City Council - Regular Meeting

Heat. Heat.

Heat. Hey, Heat.

Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. Well, welcome. It is 3:30. Time for the open session to hear public comments before close session. May we start with a roll call.

Council member Brown here. Council member Jimenez present. Council member Bana here. Council member Wilson here. Vice Mayor Robinson here. Mayor Martinez here. And council member Zapeda is ill tonight and will be joining us online, but I do not see him signed on yet. So, he's absent for Roa. Oh, he council member Zapa here. Okay. Thank you.

During close session, the council will discuss the following items. Item C1 is public employee performance evaluation title city manager. Item C2, conference with labor negotiators, agency representatives Chiron Taylor, Jack Huge, and Lisa Sha Ron. Employee organizations include SEIU Local 1021 full-time and part-time unit. of PTE local 21 mid level management and executive management units, Richmond Police Officers Association, Richmond Police Management Association, AAFF Local 188, and Richmond Fire Management Association. Item C3, conference with real property negotiators, properties located at 1414 Harbor Way South agency negotiators, Dave Alshshire, Special Council, negotiating parties, Orton Entertainment LLC, and under negotiation are the price and terms of payment. We do have two requests to address the council. If there's anyone joining us online that would like to address the council, please raise your hand at this time. First speaker is Cordell Hendler, followed by Ben Tero.

So, good afternoon, Mayor Martinez, council. For the record, I am Cordell Hen. I'm a Richmond resident. So, let's get to the point. When you go into that close session, think of all the hard work that Shasta Cura has done. Whenever policies that she implements from this council, she does it directly. So when you go back there, think of all the hard work and dedication that Shaza has done for this city. That being said, second thing is um her department heads respect her. So if they can respect her, you can respect her too. So when you go in the back, think about all the hard work she has dedicated to Richmond. Number two, regarding the uh unions, let's just get right to the point. The unions deserve a raise for a number of reasons because everything is expensive these days. So when you go back into close session, think of all the contribution that each of these organizations with that. I'll give my time to Bentio.

Bentio.

Bentio, president of the Richmond Police Officer Association. I don't disagree with Cordell that often, but I will on a a few pieces of what he had to say. Sorry. Um present teran, president of the recent police officers association speaking on their behalf. Uh tonight you guys are going to be talking about uh I want the city manager's contract and evaluation process and I want to be straightforward on that. Uh the contract of the person who runs who sets the tone for every department in this city. um that decision can't be made in an echo chamber and it definitely cannot be made in the basis of a self assessment um or necessarily a close session conversation or a handshake so to speak. So tonight the RPOA is firmly calling on this council to adopt a 360 degree evaluation process for the city manager, one that includes direct confidential input from labor uh the public um and not something just filtered through HR. a real 360 with real input from the people who actually work under this administration every single day. That is the best practice in every serious organization in the country and Richmond should not be the exception. Let me tell you why this matters. Um there are actually people and department heads who have looked elsewhere in this city. Um a lot of us all talk, a lot of us have worked here a long time. uh in the pattern of micromanagement from the city manager's office that has undermined operational decision-making uh demoralized some in staff and created confusion where there should be clarity that included a not very meaningful connection with labor and understanding labor uh specifically with this public safety labor union uh needs to be addressed. On top of that, I would suggest this and for example, at the police department, we have uh just talking about micromanagement and inefficiency, we have 24 pay changes and not just pay changes that affect my people, but affect all uh various unions uh that are being held up by the city manager's office. Um we actually have to have the chief secretary right now have

create a spreadsheet on the tracking of where all those pay changes have been since February, and they're just held up in the city manager's office. time that I'm talking about. Thank you. Now we'll move to the online speakers. And the first speaker is Don, followed by Kisma Katrana. Don, please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Hi, Don Nelson, uh, Richmond Police Officers Association. Uh, here to speak on our contract that we've been out of contract actually since July of last year. uh negotiations continue without much progress and it's hard to hold officers from leaving. Now officers are leaving. We're getting applications and as fast as we bring people on uh others leave, they're injured or they retire. Um, we've done our best to put people on hold and to let them know the contract's coming, that the city hall and council cares about the police department. But at this point, um, actions speak louder than words and we don't have a resolution. And I, we can't even tell our membership now when they may that may be because talks get stalled and they don't appear to be taken seriously. Um, I urge you to spend significant time in close session on the police department contract and let's get this things done. I yield my time.

Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Kismat Katherana. Please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Um the accessor office makes decision that affects every single uh property owner in this county. Yet most people have no idea how it works and how to challenge it. That's not transparency. That's a problem. I'm Kismouth Katrani. I am running for the county accessor role to change this. I'm running because the county deserves accountability, transparency, and measurable result. Excuse me, sir. Um, this is not the place to campaign. Okay. I Okay, good. Thank you. Sounds good. And that was our last speaker. Mayor, if I may.

Yes. Um, Shasa Curl, Richmond City Manager, Mayor Martinez, members of the Richmond City Council, and Richmond residents. As I um have indicated before, uh, I am not going to be bullied by our POA. We were scheduled to meet with them on Friday, April 17th, and they canled the meeting. We currently have 14 items that we're seeking to uh, address with them outside of regularou negotiations. And so it's really disappointing when we have time calendared to meet with them that they cancel at the last minute. Um we are endeavoring to continue to negotiate in good faith and in order to do so they have to be at the table. One of the things on the list of 14 also includes an update to um their evaluation process as well. So we look forward to coming to resolution on these things in the near term.

Thank you. Any other speakers? If not then uh open uh forum for people is closed and we will retire into close session.

Heat. Heat.

Heat. Hey, Heat.

Heat. Heat.

Greenland.

Do you know? Do you Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat. I know.

Heat. Hey, heat. Hey, heat. Hey, hey, hey.

Hey, that's

Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.

Get out.

Hey.

Heat. Heat.

Hello. I like

Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.

Hey, hey,

Hey, hey, hey.

Heat. Hey, Heat.

Heat. Heat. N. Down. Love you.

Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat. Hey, hey, hey.

Hallelujah. Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat.

This is uh the beginning of the regular meeting of the Richmond City Council. We will begin with the pledge of allegiance.

I pledge to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Roll call. Council member Brown here. Council member Jimenez presented. Council member Wilson here.

Council member Zapeda is joining us online. Council member Zapeda. Council member Zepa here. Sorry, I didn't have these. Council member Bana, I'm here. Vice Mayor Brainson here. And Mayor Martinez here. Miss Christian, sorry. Did you get my my that I'm here? Sorry, they just promoted me. Thank you. They just promoted it. So,

okay. Thank you. Next item statement is conflict of interest. Are there any? Our next item is agenda review. I do not have any changes to the agenda. Okay. Our next item is a report from the city attorney of final decisions made during close session. Good evening, mayor and city council. Uh no final actions were taken uh during close session this evening. Thank you. Okay, our next item is a report from the city manager.

KCRT, can you please put up the slide deck? Thank you. Um, this evening I want to highlight um a report that we have recently published. It's uh titled Moving Richmond Forward. It's over to the right uh underneath the screen. Um it will be published on our city website in English and Spanish. Um it's a report from me as a city manager on our city activities. Next slide, KCRT. So, what you're going to see uh before you this evening is a a uh abbreviated uh version of the entire report. And I would like to thank the city council for your ongoing leadership um and helping um develop our policy direction and um all the great work that's happened which is clearly highlighted in this report. Next slide. Next slide. Um some of the uh projects that are currently underway that many of you are uh already aware of are include our library uh renovation project which is currently under construction. That's $34 million. We also have uh in excess of $280 million in in multiple grants throughout the city. And in October of 2025, we were removed from the high-risk state audit category. Next slide. Also in our community development and public works department, I would like to thank um all of the staff in those departments um for their exceptional work this summer. We have three new park projects that are coming online at Shields Reed, Borman Park. Uh and we also completed uh Booker T. Anderson uh community center renovation. And we also are uh finalizing window park. Next slide. Um, in addition, we currently have a

$14.5 million HomeKey uh project, which is the renovation of the uh former Civic Center Hotel, also known as the M Multil 6, as well as $35 million in transformative climate communities funds and nearly an additional $20 million um that has been uh added to those funds for for over $50 million. Next slide. um in our community services department which includes youth build um youth works leap um more broadly our employment and training department our library our community services team includes recreation and uh a number of special projects in addition to ONS I really like this photo because it really illustrates um really what is when really people think about Richmond they think about the heart of our community and uh all the the unions that uh are here in our community and that where many people are employed. So, it's really great that we have our own employment and training department that helps create a middle class in our community. Next class, next slide, please. Um it's also very important for us to uh provide metrics so the community understands how many participants are being served. So, it's really great that we have two community swim centers with over 15,000 participants being served in 2025. And also, uh, one of our great public art projects that was completed in 2025 was the Parkchester mural, which included over 580 volunteers. Next slide. Next slide.

In addition, in public safety, um we had 35 graduates from the CERT Academy, over 15,000 calls for uh fire services, and over 150 fellows uh were in our ONS program. Next slide. Uh in in uh the police department, um crime was decreased and we also continue to hire and retain staff. Next slide. In terms of economic development, one of the big wins was developing the mobile vendor program and uh partnering with the farmers market to open the lot. Uh that provides an opportunity for local uh small businesses to activate our downtown and over $300,000 was a awarded in small business grants. Next slide. Um with that, I would like to say uh thank you to the entire city council for your leadership. I also want to let the city council and the community know that um when our three park renovation projects are completed, I will be retiring from the city of Richmond. Thank you so much. Okay, our next item is commendations, presentations, and proclamations. Item M1 is to receive an American Public Works Association Northern California Chapter Best Project Award in the transportation category, projects under $5 million for the Ferry to Bridge to Greenway project. And we have several speakers for this item. The speaker first, uh, Madame City Clerk, or the item first? Thank you very much. Good evening. For the record, Daniel

Chabaria, Mr. Mayor, city council members, uh DH, I'm sorry, public works director. Um it I'm standing here with a lot of excitement for for receiving this award. Um this is one of more than 100 CIP projects that the current engineering staff received. And you'll see when uh this award is presented of how many people were involved. Some of them we have the honor to have in the audience today. Some of them couldn't make it, but uh it it's gonna show how how many people it takes a village as they say. With that, I want it's my honor to introduce Mr. Brian Balbas, former polar director for Contra Costa County, former president of APWA Norl chapter and current representative from APWA Noral chapter.

Good evening, uh, mayor and city council members. Uh, as uh, Daniel said, my name is Brian Balbus. I am the immediate past president of the Northern California chapter of the American Public Works Association, also known as APWA. Uh, it's definitely my honor to be here this evening representing APWA and giving your fine city staff this award. Uh, I want to thank you for allowing me just a few moments u of your council meeting to recognize your outstanding public works staff and their department. uh the work they've done on behalf of the residents of the city of Richmond uh is really fantastic work as evidenced by this particular project as just one example. Uh as Daniel mentioned, I am a former public works employee myself. So, I truly understand uh the many challenges that your city and the public works team has in delivering the projects, programs, and services that everyday residents need and count on uh throughout our communities in Contraosta County, uh the state as well as the nation. Um as mentioned in your agenda staff report, our Northern California chapter of APWA annually recognizes outstanding projects over a broad range of categories. Uh this year Richmond's ferry to bridge to greenway or better known as F2B2G project was selected uh as project of the year in the transportation category as Daniel mentioned under $5 million. Uh the F2B2G project consisted of approximately and this is for the benefit I know that I know the council members are probably well aware of this project but for the benefit of the public and people watching uh the project consisted of approximately 2.2 25 miles of class 4 protected bikeways connecting the Richmond Ferry Terminal, the Richmond Greenway, and the Richmond San Rafale Bridge Trail. Uh this improved access for bicyclists and pedestrians and also improved multimodal connectivity through these areas. Just a

few of the components that made this project so deserving of this award include the challenges of the construction itself uh within tight heavily constrained corridors uh including the BNSF railroad corridor uh the I80 or excuse me I580 ramps and industrial corridors throughout the city. Uh coordination with multiple agencies was required in in addition to many interested parties and the public. There was a lot of public outreach and trying to determine how best to meet the needs for the community. Uh the project team diligently worked to find solutions to the issues to make this project a reality. Delivering on environmental awareness was also a key component why this project was award-winning project. uh not only in the planning and phasing of the work during construction to minimize the environmental impacts that took place during construction but also as I mentioned in delivering a multimodal transportation uh improvement that provides transportation alternatives for people now and into the future. As Daniel mentioned, it does take a village to deliver a project like this. Uh, and I just wanted to take a moment to recognize many of the individuals who worked on this project for the city of Richmond. Uh, your public works director, Daniel, uh, Robert Armo, the city engineer, Ysef Mones Munoz, uh, capital project or capital manager. I apologize, I do not pronounce names that well. Uh, Supervisor Joy can attest to that from my days with Contraosta County. Uh Robert Stevens uh was a lead designer for CSWST2. Uh Lena Velasco, community development director. Uh Patrick Failan, he's a former uh city of Richmond employee. Uh very instrumental in a lot of trail improvements throughout the city and other areas. Tony Perez, uh the

construction manager for the uh contractor, uh WR Ford. Dan Santos, assistant engineer, helped in the project closeout for this project. Dante Wy with FDR. Bruce Bayart, uh, track chair. Bruce Brew, uh, Brewbaker from Place Works, Kin Chang from Public Works Engineering, um, Halal Hamden, uh, from Public Works Engineering. Also like to thank some of the partners that helped in the development of the project and to make sure it was truly successful. bike East Bay, Rich City Rides, and Tool Design. Uh so, finally, I'd like to just finish off my presentation to um again congratulate the city on this award and also to let you know that this award has been forwarded to APWA National for consideration as part of the national awards that will be given out uh in late August of this year at the annual PWX conference in Houston, Texas. So, uh, hoping that the city will will do well and and be able to be represented. Uh, so again, thank you for allowing me some time to be here this evening. And again, congratulations to your public works department.

I have the award here. I don't know if you want to take a moment, maybe take a picture with uh with staff. Everybody facing that way. I just want to say we have the best public

works team. They're awesome. Not just about this project, responding to the public's request. Let's get together for a picture. I feel I feel in a karaoke right now. Okay.

Awesome. At least we have

I'll put it back in the box for you. Yes.

Well, I just want to thank our public works team. They're awesome. They're great. All the emails from the residents, they take care of it like this. Uh thank you so much all of you. Wonderful job. Transparent, accountable, reliable. Thank you. Okay, we have speakers for this item. We have seven speakers in person. Anyone joining us online that would like to address the council on this item, please raise your hand at this time. Speakers are Cordell Hendler, Helan Hamen, Wendy Wellbrook, Joseph Munoz, Daniel Shabaria, Bruce Brewbaker, Bruce Bard, and our last speaker will be Patrick Failen, in person speaker.

Okay. So, good evening, Mayor Martinez, Council. For the record, I am Cordel Hendler. I'm a Richmond resident. So, congratulations, uh, public works for this honor. It's like, wow. is this is all the hard work that y'all put in for this project. It is com completely amazing. So, can we give them another round of applause for that? So, and I said in the words of Humphrey Bogart, here's looking at you, Richmond. So, with that, I'll pass my time to the next speaker, Helen Hampton.

Good evening, Mayor Martinez. City Council Member Hilal Ham, senior civil engineer, public works engineering. My boss is here. Tonight's celebration of the F2B2G project, the ferry to bridge to greenway is about more than just a path or a connection. It represents a vision for more accessible, sustainable, and vibrant city. But this milestone is also special, poignant, because we are honoring the man who helped make so much of this progress possible. As Robert Armho, our deputy public works city engineer, prepares for a new chapter. It's hard to look anywhere in the city without seeing his influence etched into our landscape. Robert always understood the public works isn't just about concrete and steel. It's about the people who rely on them. Whether it's it was the tireless work behind the winning massive multi-million million dollar grants that funded our future or the quiet meticulous oversight ensuring the safety of the bridges we cross every day. Robert has been our anchor. He he hasn't just built infrastructure. He has built a culture of excellence and a standard of public service that is second to none. Commander Robert, thank you for your vision, but more importantly, thank you for mentoring s such a talented staff, a leader. True legacy isn't just found in projects they complete, but it's in the people they live behind. That legacy lives on in the superstar team you built, Darcy, Wendy, Andy, Gail, Janie, and of course, playmaker Joseph. I've watched this group tackle complex problems with the same grit and

determination you modeled for years and I know they will continue to push our city forward with the same mindset you in instilled in them. Your time is expired. Your time is expired. All right. Well, thank you very much, Robert. Wendy Wellbrook.

Good evening, Mayor Martinez and members of the city council. My name is Wendy Walrock and I'm a senior civil engineer in the city's public works department. I live in Richmond with my family and we are frequent users of Richmond's public spaces. Huge congrats to my colleagues and the public works department on being awarded the APWA Northern California best project award for the ferry to bridge greenway project. While we celebrate this high achievement, it's a bitter mo it's a bittersweet moment for me as I'd like to take this moment to acknowledge a key reason for our team success. Deputy director and city engineer Robert Armo, who will soon be moving on to his next chapter. Robert made a risky decision to hire me as a senior engineer just three months into his tenure with the city. Over the past three and a half years, Robert has been a steady leader and a dedicated mentor who helped rebuild and establish the team we have today. Our successes are never the work of one person and he consistently modeled the belief that the sum of our collective efforts is far greater than any individual contribution. He showed us that when we collaborate as a team, we can achieve far more for the residents of Richmond than we ever could alone. We are certainly going to feel the impact of losing such a vital part of our sum. I'll always carry a piece of advice he often shared with the team. He'd say, "When you're focused on climbing a mountain, it's easy to get overwhelmed by the peaks still ahead. But it's important to look down and see how far you've already come. Progress isn't always linear. Sometimes we take two steps back before making a step forward. And in the middle of complex projects and moments of feeling completely overwhelmed, that perspective, that perspective kept us grounded and reminded us of our progress. Robert, thank you for trusting me, for your leadership, your mentorship, and for showing us the view from the climb. You leave the city and team in a much better place and I wish you the very best.

Joseph Munoz,

press the button.

Good evening, Mayor Martinez and fellow council members. Um, I'm here to congratulate, of course, the number one department in the city of Richmond, Department of Public Works on the award. Many more to come. Many more to come. um with of course your guys' support, city managers, leadership, finance as well to make public works happen. It takes a village. However, today we want to honor a special person. That person has um let's just say made me realize that behind the scenes we do a lot and it's we were working on transparency. We're working on ways to really bring it out. But in our closed door meetings, in our team meetings, in our monthly meetings, he's always shown up. He's always provided that stability that you need. Especially when you you know in my in my case I left the place after being there for 15 years and I've only worked in one place for 15 years. So, making that big jump here, you definitely needed the foundation to make you feel comfortable, to make you feel welcomed, to make you feel like you, you know, you're valuable. And Robert has provided that personally to me. And more importantly, I hopefully the city of Richmond has seen that even though it's only been a short tenure. Um, as we always joke around, we're sending him to training. And, um, with that said, I just wanted to say thank you, Robert, for your wisdom. Um, I would say in the end, uh, I would sing a song with the 46 seconds because I'm not usually here, but I won't. So, I just wanted to say thank you, Robert.

Daniel Sharia.

Hello again. Mayor Martinez, city council members, Dina Chia, polywor director. Um, as Wendy said, it is a a little bittersweet this moment that we're celebrating this award and at the same time saying goodbye to Robert at least for a for a while because as you know, we're sending you for training, right?

So, I I always tell this story and I'm not I'm not going to get tired of telling it again. I joined the city three and a half years ago. Robert joined a month after I joined and I I truly believe I wouldn't last three months here without him. He is truly not only one of the best engineers I know. His level of integrity, professionalism, and leadership are going to be missed here in the city of Richmond. But we're going to follow your your example, Robert. You you're leaving this department is stronger. the engineers, the team that we have is we can we can is second to none. And again, we're going to welcome back when you're tired of that training.

Bruce Brewaker.

Good evening. Uh, I'm Bruce Brewbaker.

Bruce Brewaker. I am uh a Richmond resident and also the principal of place works. Uh, I was the principal in charge for the project for the planning and design of the project. Um, kudos to public works, the entire staff to get this built. I just want to acknowledge the process of doing the planning and design of the project. Um, we had a big team. CSW engineers, Robert Stevens is here, Michael Vidra was part of the team, Tool Design was part of the team, and city staff helped a lot in the planning process, including Lena Velasco and um, Patrick Felen. Um, the project has won another award. uh in 2024, the planning of the project won an American planning association transportation project of the year award for the entire state of California. So this this is a dual award-winning project and um I'm very proud to have worked on it and so happy to hear about this additional award from the public works department. Um I I did want to mention that the the funding for the planning of the award was uh by Calrans. It was a CALR sustainable uh communities planning grant. So anyways, thank you very much.

Bruce Bayer, Mr. Mayor, members of the council, my name is Bruce Byer. I'm the chair of Track Trails Richmond Action Committee. uh to explain this two and a quarter mile trail is a key part of the San Francisco Bay trail where it detours inland around the working port facilities in Richmond and so this is a big improvement to pedestrian and bicycle safety in the area. Uh the as Bruce Brewbaker said the plant was planned fair to bridge the greenway plan was funded by a CALR grant and track prepared that grant application that brought $2676,000 to the city to prepare the plan which was approved by the city council in 2021 and five years later four years later the priority project was done a big priority project the two and a quarter miles. The next one also the good news is in play uh through down the point Richmond historic district. We have the bike way protected completed from the greenway to point Richmond and from the ferry trouble to point Richmond but not through Point Richmond to the Richmond Centerfell Bridge Trail and the Point Motti Trail now under construction. One important thing I'd like to point out is construction of this trail was funded in part by donations from the private sector. $424,000 were donated by five companies who had development projects on cutting Hoffman and Harbor Way South. These were three uh warehouse projects uh Sims Metals and Chevron service station. So they get credit in addition to the grant funds that help pay for this project. Uh finally, I just want to thank public works for getting this done, for carrying this out. I mean, so many plans, we've all seen it sit on shelves gathering dust. This one didn't. It's being implemented, and that's really

something the city can be proud of. So, thank you very much. Our last inerson speaker is Patrick Failen.

Um, hello, uh, mayor and council members, um, and everyone else that I know here. Um, thanks so much for inviting me back. I'm Patrick Failen. Um, I worked for the city for 12 years up until about three years ago. So, I pieced out in the middle of this project that we're all talking about. So many people are involved over the years. Um, I just want to say that I really uh I miss Richmond and I really enjoyed my time here. I learned a lot working for this city. It really helped me grow as a person and as a a civil servant. Um, I also want to um thank the community for their patience during the construction. and I remember that it was kind of a mess and it took a long time, but it all came through. Um, I really also wanted to thank Bruce Bert for all of his leadership um on the Bay Trail. I want to thank uh Robert Stevens and Michael Vidra who I really uh relied on uh during the construction. I want to thank Topofi for all of his uh friendship and mentoring. And then just from a you know outside perspective, I live in Berkeley and I now work for the city of Oakland. And I just want to say that uh people talk about this project in other places. I know we want to build things for the people of Richmond, but it's a regional facility. Um people are really happy about it. And the Bay Trail in Richmond is is really amazing and it's I think better than maybe any other city in the area. So um thanks for inviting me back and congratulations.

That was our last inerson speaker. Now we'll move to the online speakers. We have one speaker and that speaker is Susan Lustik. Please unmute yourself and you may begin. Hello. Can you hear me? Yes. Oh,

hello Mayor and council members. Thank you for having me. Uh I'm here to talk about Marina Bay. Again, my name is Susan Leig and I've been a resident and a homeowner of Marina Bay for 38 years. uh which means I've driven from the freeway exit down Marina Bay Parkway hundreds of times uh which is about a mile to my house and I'm here to explain what uh we have I have found out in our committee I am on the Marina Bay Lighting and Landscaping Committee and I have been for nine years and um for all of that time I personally have and asking why we can't use some of our reserve money.

Uh I I hate to interrupt you, but uh I don't believe you're on topic. We're talking about the uh um award that we received for the Bay Trail. So if you can speak Yes, we are. Oh, well I was a I was asked uh to speak on this subject. So, when would be a better time for me to get back on during an open forum. Oh, I thought that's what this was. She called my name.

I'm sorry. You must have signed up for the wrong item. Anyway, my uh our apologies. You can speak uh during open forum. And that was the last speaker.

Yes. Yeah. So, I I did want to make a quick comment. Um, first is just to say um just my sincere thanks for the public works department. It's a phenomenal uh change that I've seen being in Richmond for so many years working with different people through the various works that I've done. The team that we have now is phenomenal. Um, and I'm really sorry to hear that you're leaving, Robert. um especially um after hearing the the testimonials from your co-workers which means a lot right that means a lot um I also wanted to um just congratulate Bruce Bayer I know as an advocate I think some people maybe under um underestimate the power of the work that you do to make serious transformative change for thousands and thousands of people um in Richmond in the Bay Area the work that you do at track is making it possible for people to enjoy our shoreline um in a way that will you know change lives for generations. Just really want to acknowledge that and say thank you. And then also acknowledge um my old friend Patrick Failen before I even I was on council um just he he he was a part of a public works that was not today's public works and you know the way that he was kind of forced to hold projects um at him and the other people who were on the team without the proper support without the proper staffing um but still maintained a visionary stance to take on uh and and try to do these kind this kind of work um is really a testimonial to his character and to the character of the people who believed in work like this. Um so I just really wanted to just call that out and say thank you Patrick for your sacrifices

when you were kind of in it you know without the proper support and then thank you so much to the existing team um who who are the leaders that we need. Um thank you so much No, no, go ahead.

Well, I already praised public works department, but I just wanted to add I'm impressed by the spirit of teamwork. I mean, coming and celebrating Robert's Robert, I didn't know you were leaving. I hope you'll be back after your training. Yeah, we've, you know, we've been in touch on different projects and um yeah, I think I've been in touch with all of you and different things and thank you so much public works. But I just wanted to congratulate public works leadership team to fostering such teamwork spirit. I admire it. Keep up the good work. Thank you.

No. Okay. Uh I' I'd like to say that um throughout history we've uh known that the environment shapes culture. Uh but with the uh advent of the urban city, we also know that culture shapes the environment. And uh uh when people recognize the changes that the culture is creating like more bike trails, making the city more pedestrian and bicycle friendly, uh it's great to have people who amplify that change, who can recognize where we're going and amplify it so that we move that in that direction much much faster. So, I appreciate all of the uh advocates who have made this possible and I also appreciate all of the hard workers and designers who have made it possible. Uh you have made Richmond a better city and I would like to say that it's uh becoming a destination city with the changes that you've made. So many many thanks to you. And not only that, but the not only the physical changes in culture, but the camaraderie, the way that you work together has also shaped the the the culture of the city, and I appreciate that. So, thank you very much. So, if there are no other council members who want to speak to this, I know that we all uh feel the same way about the fantastic work that you've done as well as uh being done under under the leadership of our city manager who who has uh made it possible for us to work together. So, I want to thank you. Um thank you. Thank you. Thank you. So, next item, please.

Our next item is open forum. And if there's anyone joining us online that would like to speak under open forum, please raise your hand at this time. Open for forum is an opportunity to address the council on items that remain on the consent calendar or items that are not on the agenda. None of the items on the consent calendar have been removed. During open forum dialogue between the council and the speaker is prohibited. See, we'll start with the in-person speakers and then move to the online speakers. When your name is called, please come forward and line up behind the speakers podium closest to the wall. And for your safety, all the aisles, including the area behind the speakers podium and staff presentation area, must remain clear. When you're called to address the council, state your name and your city of residence is optional. Please terminate your address to the council when your time expires. Inerson speakers, we have 12 inerson speakers and we have seven online speakers. So each speaker shall be allowed up to a minute and a half to address the council. each the city of Richmond. We welcome your comments and request that you present your remarks in a respectful and appropriate manner within the established time limit. First group of speakers, Cordial Hendler, Don Gazny, Lily Rehea, Cindy Hatton, Elizabeth Woods, Michael Habma, Margarita Mitas, Lynn Tero, Mark Wasber, Ashton Damon, Belle Moore, and our last inerson speaker will be Ben Tero Cordell Hendler.

Thank you. So, good evening, Mayor Martinez, Council. For the record, I am Cordel Hland. I'm a rich and resident. So, picture this. What would I do with $550 million from Chevron? First thing I would do is um I would fix our streets because if you go down to the south side of Richmond on any given day, the streets are so narrow. How narrow is it? It's so narrow. Cleopatra couldn't even go through there. And it's terrible because I get complaints from my the neighbors. They're saying it's too narrow because when they drop their kids off at school, people they can't even go through. So that's so that's what I would do with that money. Number one. Number two is um I was watching the city of Pol's council meeting and they had a um a presentation from a consultant to do the recruitment for a city manager and it got me thinking h what would I do with that $550 million too? I would hire a consultant because if you look at the city's org chart, it's been 2023 and here it is two and a half years later going on three. We need we need to decipher how what our assessments are for by department. So that's what I would do with that money. And then when I heard that the city manager was is thinking about leaving, I said some nice things about her. She has done a lot for Richmond. And for when I heard that she's going to be leaving after the parks are done, she's not going nowhere. Not on my watch. She has done a one. She has done a good job for Richmond. So if I can get a hallelujah up in here. Hallelujah.

Don Gosney.

I know I'm going to be cut off before I finish, but I got to get out something because every every time I show up here, I keep reducing the amount of time we're allowed to speak. We're all out in our community on a regular basis, but are we really listening to what our neighbors are telling us? And since we're electing a mayor and three council members in just a few weeks, it's even more important that we all listen, really listen to the message they're telling us. They may be using words about crime, taxes, affordable housing, safe streets, and a host of other issues, but the message they're conveying is they want hope. Hope for a better future. We all want a roof over our heads and food in front of our family members. So, how are we supposed to infuse hope? The hope our neighbors so desperately need. Does it start here in these council chambers? Well, that's a yes and a no. Part of that may be answered when the votes are counted after June 2nd. One other source of hope is when people like me, and I am not unique, when we rise up and offer career opportunities, as I've done many dozens of times over the decades, I wanted the good people of Richmond to know that my union, the Plumbers and Steam Fitters Local 342, is offering signups through throughout May to to test to get into our nationally recognized apprentice programs. Even though we're all about piping systems, we don't test your ability to put pipes together. We test your ability to learn. We're not about to invest a quarter of a million dollars on trying to test anybody that is inca either incapable or unwilling to learn. The applications are online throughout May. Look at the phone number and email address on the board in front of my handsome face and reach out and I can provide an extremely helpful packet with all the information you may want and need. We cover industrial and commercial pipe fitting, commercial plumbing like you would you see in a skyscraper, hospital, computer chip plants, and the and the like. The pipelines, HVAC, and pipe welding. And now they're gonna tell me, "Shut up and sit down." Don Lily Rahima. Good evening, uh, mayor and council members. My name is Lily Bradma. I'm the community engagement manager with the Chevron Richmond refinery. giving you an

update this evening on Chevron's community action plan launched in 2024 which focuses on strengthening community engagement and improving transparency around safety related topics. Um as part of this effort, Chevron has initiated a series of community resilience grants to support trusted local partners particularly in fencine communities. The first grant supports Lifelong Medical Care's asthma health promoter program, which trains local community members to work directly with Richmond families and help them manage their um asthma. Uh the second is MCE's home energy savings program. This provides income qualifying homeowners with free home energy assessments and upgrades that can improve indoor quality, lower energy bills, and make homes healthier. Chevron support helps expand access for residents in fence line communities and in North Richmond. And the third partnership is with the American Red Cross through their sound the alarm initiative which will take place this Saturday, April 25th, at the Shields Reed Community Center, which installs free smoke alarms and provides sa fire safety education. I also want to invite the community to our community action plan town hall this Thursday, April 23rd at KOBiz at 6 PM. It's an opportunity to hear updates on Chevron's flaring improvement efforts and to learn more about these community resilient partnerships. Thank you.

Cindy head

Cindy Hayden, Richmond resident. Thank you so much for bringing back Detective Hodgeges, restoring him to duty and not keeping him off as as unprecedented amount of time that you kept officers Remick and Stockton. That was uh a little cruel because being a police officer is not what they are, but it's who they are. They have to keep a large part of themselves of who they are in abandonance while awaiting a return to duty. No one talks about the impact taking a life has on the officer, on their spouse, on their children and the department. It takes a real toll. There's whispers in the community that they have to deal with. Whispers in the department they have to deal with. Nobody talks about that. It's it's very difficult thing to come to terms with. It doesn't matter that the officer is cleared and found to have acted in self-defense and in defense of others. You still hear the comments in the background. So, um I just I just pray for all of those who are impacted by the loss of life. Thank you,

Elizabeth Woods. Okay. Hello, my name is Elizabeth Woods. Good evening, mayor and city council meetings. Um, I'm a resident in Nevin Plaza. I'm here because I have grave concerns regarding the structural integrity of the building following the recent renovation. I am going to handle hand the clerk photos of what was covered up. These photos show that structural work at Neban Plaza was in many cases purely cosmetic. I have documented rotten concrete that was packed with mortar simply sanded and painted over rather than structurally reinforced. You will see the images of active concrete spalding where the masonary is crumbling to the touch exposed taping wires. Um I have brought these concerns to Antinet and code enforcement. Antonet responded that she would do whatever is necessary to protect her business. But who's protecting the the residents? We're talking about a multi-million dollar renovation intended for seniors. I got sick over this. Painting over rot is not a renovation. is a cover up and asking the city council to initiate an independent structural foundation audit of the building's envelope and concrete with equipment to look through the structure and foundation of the building and then check each floor to see where the floorboards are separating from the floors and look at the cracks in the stairways and look behind the walls of the elevator. Address the sink hole in front of the building. U tenants have been diagnosed with um cancer and have died from it. Tenants are on respiratory machines. I have had bronchitis twice. Don't wait till the building fail and it will tend uh and that's it right now. Thank you,

Michael Hibma.

Good evening, mayor, council members. My name is Michael Hibma. My wife and I live on 28th and Grant in district 6. Um we live on a stretch of Grand Avenue that is about seven blocks long about a quarter mile uh about 45 feet from curb to curb recently repaved nice and smooth and has attracted an increasing number of speeding and other dangerous driving. Um, while timing is everything, it would have been great to have the uh public works people still here to listen because I know there is a process for submitting traffic calming um infrastructure, namely speed bumps, which I did on March 10th, 2025. I submitted a request, didn't hear anything back. Submitted another request on July 16th and was assigned an inquiry number of 125. I've submitted three uh follow-up emails August 13th, September 7th, and January 30th this year and have not received any response. No update, no nothing. Uh the situation is steadily getting worse. Uh Grant Avenue is used daily by a lot of people such as myself walking our dogs, walking to school. Grant a Grant School is at the uh western end of this stretch of road and the speeding seems to be getting worse. Um, it's nice the road is smooth, but it's unfortunate that the speeding also increased. Uh, we need some help. Um, can I please find out a way we can get an update on this and see if we can get some infrastructure and to make things safer? Thank you,

Margarita. Meet us. I get two minutes, right? Because it's a 1.30. That's what you get. That's it. I thought it was two minutes. Are you ready?

Okay. Okay. Good evening, Marina Bay. Good evening, Mayor and Council members. My name is Margarita Midas and I'm here on behalf of the Marina Bay Neighborhood Council and the residents of Marina Bay. We often hear council members advocating for their neighborhoods. However, that is not our experience in Marina Bay. For years, the neighborhood council has shown up as volunteers, holding meetings, submitting letters, and asking our district council member for help. Yet, Marina Bay continues to be ignored. Despite the campaign promises, we've seen no action. Meanwhile, the city continues to approve and advance projects that directly uh impact Marina Bay. Tonight, I want to connect a few of those proposed projects. the Transmonaine expansion. It's going to add 30 trains, 95 trucks, hazardous materials, 24/7 operations, raising concerns about safety, noise, and environmental exposure. Marina Point Development adds housing without addressing infrastructure and traffic constraints. Open AAI's newest tenant expansion with uh 277 247 operations potential growth yet no commitment to the community local hiring nor a clear plan for how equipment will be delivered or how operations will impact traffic. These are cumulative impacts that are going to that are going to impact daily lives. And while this is growth moving forward, long-standing community requests remain unressed. We still are asking for a quiet zone. We're still asking for pedestrian safety improvements where near miss incidents are still occurring. We're still asking for park investments. And despite all of this, we're still not seeing advocacy or responsiveness. We need accountability. I'm still asking the council mayor tonight.

Thank you. All right. Thank you, Lero. I want to say something and that is on the account on the agenda it says that you have two minutes and I have practiced for two minutes and why that is wrong I don't we're going by the rules and procedures why advertise different um yeah we you have a minute and a half are you ready I have the agenda on my you have a minute and a half right now and we still have people online that want to speak

there's there's There's one person more behind me. I just think it's wrong. We have you have seven other speakers midstream. Are you ready? I am ready. Okay. Thank you.

Okay. City Council members and Mayor Martinez, my name is Lynn Tero and I have been a resident of Richmond for over 40 years. Thank you for taking the time to listen to me. As a resident of Marina Bay, my council member is Sue Wilson. I am speaking directly to her. There have been several times in the past weeks when I've tried to contact her by me email. When I received no answer, I kept trying. Then I posted on Next Door and let her know that I was posting and ask if anyone knew how to contact her. Someone suggested that I call the city hall. I did that and after leaving several messages, I got a call that she would that I should email her or they would email her and let her know I wanted to speak. Still no email. I also tried the phone number listed in the city's website. The post the phone book is full. So I guess there's no one no other way to talk to her than to do it right now. Next, I wrote with a subject line, "What do you have to hide?" And I finally got an answer. The response was she didn't have time for a oneon-one with her constituents and therefore I should email her my concerns. My concerns are I can't get hold of her. Needless to say, I am here now because it seems like the only way to talk with her. My concern is she hasn't paid any attention to matters of Marina Bay. She made promises when she ran and she has not kept them. I am just one of her 19,675 constituents and I should have a voice and someone to speak for my neighbors and

your time is expired. Thank you Mark Wasber. I will. What happened here? Mark, are you ready? Yeah, I'm ready. I'm not getting no sound out of this stupid packs. Well, lost that. Wait a minute here.

You want to come back? No, I got it.

One day Democrats will stop acting like retards. that one day they'll stop letting criminals into our country just so they can steal elections. They finally realize they are only two genders and that men can never get pregnant. They stop letting mentally ill perverts into women's bathrooms and little girls locker rooms. I have a dream that Democrats stop believing in that green new scam and defund the police nonsense that they quit trying to censor any speech they don't like because it makes them look stupid. They never again teach any of that critical race and transgender to our little children. They stop dividing us by the color of our skin and not by the content of our character. I have a dream that one day Democrats will stop acting like a bunch of woke little retards.

Who did this? Cuz it's freaking hilarious. This person deserves it. I have a dream that we're going to get rid of the RPA and they're a bunch of garbage and get rid of the corrupt cops we have. Our next speaker is Ashton, followed by Beella Moore. And then our last inerson speaker is Ben Tero. Ashton.

Wow. Okay. Uh, okay. Sorry. Wow, that was interesting. Um, hello city council. My name is Ashton. I am a resident of the city and also a member of the city's youth council. Um I'm here to speak on a matter which is really important to me as a resident of the city and other residents of the city. I'm here to talk about what's known as APB, accessible push buttons, um which really don't exist in the city. Uh so those are really important because those are things you press while you're crossing the street on a crosswalk. You press it, it gives you auditory signals and even motion motor signals to be able to cross the street more accessibly. And as someone that's been diagnosed with a condition which made me low vision as of last September, it's really a thing that is needed um to be able to move in the celely more move in the city more accessibly. Um and sadly, you know, it's a thing that's in other cities. If you go to San Pablo, Oerto, Oakland, all of our neighbors really here in the Bay Area, they have them, but sadly we don't. We only have them in the Marina district and obviously that's not where the majority of the residents live. And you know, also as another person mentioned earlier, the traffic in the city or the way drivers drive is crazy to say the least. And with that, it makes it truly scary as someone that is low vision to cross the street without those auditory signals which can help out um due to the crazy driving. So overall, I emailed all of you, including the city manager. Sadly, no response, but I would truly hope to get some action on this because this is just a public safety initiative which needed to be spearheaded to ensure that all residents have a Richmond that's accessible for them. Uh the city manager mentioned in her amazing report about moving Richmond forward. We must move Richmond forward in a way that is accessible for all of its residents. Thank you.

Very good Moore. Hi, good evening uh mayor, vice mayor, uh members of the city council and city manager. I'm Bel Moore. I am here just to introduce myself as your point of contact for PG&. Uh it's actually been really wonderful that uh with my new position in a different company that I still get to work in Richmond and still get to cover West Contraosta. Thank you. Our last inerson speaker is Ben Tero.

Ben Tero, president of the Richmond Police Officers Association. I have a dream that one day I will not have to follow Mark Wasber in public comment, but that has yet to be realized. It's good to see uh our county supervisor, John Joya. Joel, if you're listening in the back, I got some police staffing things for you to follow up on from your article from the Richmond side. Uh, police staffing currently at 147, lowest in uh, Richmond history, well over 30 years. Needs to be in the 170s, 180s for our population in demand. Uh, young man back was talking about crossings uh, and auditory uh, understandings for folks that make crossings and people should have that across uh, when they when they cross the street. Should also be able to have proper traffic enforcement, which we cannot do with our current staffing numbers. Um, I hear a lot of people talking about staffing numbers, but here's the reality. There are 112 officers available on the street currently that are available. We might have 130, but there's plenty of people in training or some other form of employment, not necessarily available, so they don't really count. And again, the correct number is in the 170s and 180s. You have three reports on that. two that the city council paid for um the Rafelis the matrix report and then of course the Contraosta County grand jury said that we do not have enough police officers in Richmond. That needs to change. I mean I looked at this little uh piece of propaganda. It's very nice. We've lost

about 30 cops. So that kind of deletes that. A couple of these people have left here. So they're not in that photo anymore. And then budget-wise, this is budget dust on economic development. We can do better and we should. Thank you. That was our last inerson speaker. Now we'll move to the online speakers. And we currently have nine speakers. The first speaker is Julie Freestone, followed by Samantha Torres, Susan Lustik, Annie King, Meredith, Arto Rentila, Mark S. Lorie Hart, Zoom user, and Tarnell Abbott will be the last speaker. Julie, please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Um, I also thought I had two minutes, but I am Julie Freestone, a resident of Richmond for 36 years. Most recently, I've been commenting at city council meetings about illegal fireworks, their impact on older people, um, pets, the fire dangers they present, accidents they cause, and more. And last summer, I talked about how the Richmond Police Department, Fire Department, and Public Works stepped up to increase July 4th enforcement and conduct community education to be sure residents understood that fireworks are illegal in Richmond. So, today, I particularly want to commend city council members Wilson and Gimenez for moving forward with something our grassroots um stop illegal fireworks group recommended. Um, and I was going to tell you a story about how um people work stop fishing bodies out of the water and go upstream to see why the bodies are washing down. But I'll tell you that story some other time. Meanwhile, the item on the council agenda tonight uses that strategy upstream to see why what's happening to encourage Governor Nuomo to work with Nevada to keep illegal fireworks from coming into California. We hope the city council will explore other strategies um local strategies including identifying local suppliers, increasing fines the way San Pablo and other cities have done and changing the culture so everyone in the community plays a role in helping their neighbors find safer ways to celebrate important holidays. Thank you.

Thank you. And the next speaker is Samantha Torres. Please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Hi. Good evening, mayors, council members, and staff. My name is Samantha Torres, and I'm here tonight president of the Richmond United Soccer Club. We are just 50 days away from the FIFA World Cup, the largest sporting event in the world, hosted across the United States, Canada, and Mexico, including Levby Stadium a mere 50 miles away. Rich United Socc once again help put Richmond on the map. We will be hosting the city's only official FIFA fan zone watch parties here in our community in partnership with the SS Red Oak Victory and East Brother Beer Company. We'll bring families together to enjoy these glo global games locally. These events are free to the public, but space is limited. Visit richmond united soccerclub.org for more information. As part of our think global play local campaign, we recently returned from London with the Norcow Premier Soccer League, a trip that reinforce reinforced the urgency for the McDonald Minfield project. The project aims to expand access to community soccer in the Iron Triangle by using vacant blighted city-owned land temporarily and bring our community together through safe inclusive spaces to play. We've gathered over 738 signatures on our change.org petition along with endorsements from the Iron Triangle Neighborhood Council, McDonald Avenue businesses, and members of this council. Two weeks ago, the Sebastapole City Council unanimously approved a nearly identical project, joining cities like Alama, Oakland, and Napa in recognizing the value of activating victory land for community soccer use. I look forward to returning in May to honor the Rich United Soccer Club for 30 years of service and to formally request your support. I hope to see the same level of enthusiasm here in Rich.

Thank you. Your time is expired. The next speaker is Susan Lustik. Please unmute yourself and you may begin. Hello again. Uh I have uh been a homeowner in Marina Bay for 38 years and for the last nine years I've served on the Marina Bay Lighting and Landscape uh district committee and uh we meet every month to go over the expenses and revenues uh about of the taxes that all of the property owners pay into. And the reason why I'm here now is to uh let you know that last Thursday it was explained to us that the the city council is not in favor of supporting uh special districts of which there are only two in Richmond and Marina Bay is one of them. and the city of Richmond staff, they're they don't have enough people to keep up the landscaping and weeding in Marina Bay. And it's never looked so bad in all the 38 years that I've lived here. and uh we ask them to use our reserve account to hire uh spe contractors to help them and they say that they can't do that and that we need to talk to the city council about it. So it feels like we're going around in circles not getting any support. That's what I needed to describe. Thank you.

Thank you. The next speaker is Annie King Meredith. Please unmute yourself and you may begin. Yes. Good evening, Mayor Martinez and Vice Mayor U Robinson. This is Annie King Meredith, and I am bringing to the council of a concern that I had uh about the event that took place for Earth Day on Saturday. As I was there that many individuals had came to me complaining about the restrooms. The restrooms were dirty. They were undesirable. The They had no um tissue paper. The paper had looked like it had been there for years. There were no um seat covers. There was no soap. There were hair on the ladies rooms, on the bathrooms. The men's bathroom was in disarray also. And this was at the beginning of 8:00. No one else had time to come there. So it could not be said that this was happening during the time of the event where things were being uh off at Wildcat Creek or at Shields Street. So my thing is it was deplorable. Someone needs to be accountable of how the bathrooms were. And it was just so disgusting. So I'm bringing it to your attention and hope that it never happens again. This was Earth Day and someone need to be accountable for this action. Thank you.

Thank you. The next speaker is Arto Rentila. You may unmute yourself. You may begin.

Hi, my name is Arto Rila. I was calling uh in to invite uh everybody here that can hear my voice to the Fairmeid Hilltop Neighborhood Council uh in Hilltop Community Church uh mayoral conference 2026. It'll be held uh this Thursday uh Thursday uh April 23rd at 6:30 p.m. It'll be streamed live to YouTube and Facebook on everybody's uh Richmond page. And I wanted to uh let the uh viewing audience know in in the event that they didn't know that the candidates for mayor this year are uh the current mayor Eduardo Martinez, uh our city council member Claudia Jimenez, uh Mr. Mark Wasber and Mr. Demlis Johnson III and Mr. Ahmad Anderson. So, uh, come on out. April 23rd, this Thursday, 6:30, the Hilltop Community Church located at, uh, 3118, uh, Shane Drive up in Hilltop. Thank you.

Thank you. The next speaker is Marquez. Please unmute yourself and state your last name for the record. You may begin.

Richmond polit here. I missed the last couple meetings thanks to a nasty respiratory infection that completely took my voice out. But I got to say, Richmond kept brewing the ride tea. And honey, it worked. Now, let's talk about our financial geniuses. Council member Jimenez and Mayor Martinez have been doing victory laps, telling everybody they saved taxpayers $84 million. Sounds great until you hear the part they don't tell you. That was only near-term savings in exchange for $119 million more in additional taxes starting in 2035, right when the Chevron gravy train calls out of the station. So that's my savings, folks. That's about $35 million in new debt. And on top of that, they gave away $40 million owed to Richmond taxpayers in their back room point Milani deal. So altogether, taxpayers are rough with $75 million deeper in the hole. financial geniuses. I'll let you steep on that. Then there's the ethics issue. The mayor and the three council members on the left there voted against an independent investigation into the community police review commission after their investigator resigned and blew that whistle. Then the last month, six CPRC commissioners gave speeches about transparency and accountability for the police and then voted against it for themselves. That's not irony. That's a pattern. And finally, Council Member Jimenez, Mayor Martinez, members of the RPA and East Bay DSA. What they don't highlight for folks is that the RPA is rooted in Marxism and the East Bay DSA in Marxism and communism.

Thank you. Your time is expired. The next speaker is Zoom user. Please state your first and last name for the record and you may begin.

Claudia Citroen. Uh on April 6, 22, Miss Curl was sworn in by uh Pamela Anderson. It's just four years where you moved mountains. So I just wanted to acknowledge that. I think after Bill Lind, nobody thought that anyone could step into his shoes. You stepped into high heels with grace. So I just want to acknowledge that. Um the reason why I'm calling in is um every meeting there's someone from Northeast complaining rightfully complaining about uh speeding that started once Garbin got these five speed bumps which were uh which are still only um zoned for uh parking lots not for uh busy thoroughares. We need more than a better solution than speed bumps here and there because the more speed bumps you you install in Northeast. The more traffic moves into side streets, Grant is now one. Gainor is one. Um McBride got is is sort of off the hook. Esmont is off the hook. We need a better solution and you need to focus on that. We have so many people with their dogs and so many seniors in our neighborhood. We have many families with their young children moving in and we need um neighborhood access traffic only. It's a different concept. It's not that difficult. Everyone else around us does it. So um if the planning the new planning department please wraps its brain around instead of just um taking all the the complaints from us for

Thank you. Your time has expired. The next speaker is Lori Hart. Lori, please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Good evening. Lori Hart, Prochester Village. Mayor, city council, uh, city manager Curl, I first want to echo the comments on the agenda and the changes. The city council has allowed 80 to 100 children to come there and get two minutes each. Yet today, the residents only get a minute and 30. But this tonight is specifically for city manager curl. You have my head and my heart hurting. We need checks and balances. We need checks and balances. I would like to take a moment, just a few seconds to give you your verbal flowers. Okay. I want to thank you for the success and achievement of the police department, the B3 credit rating, which is a major improvement from where you were, where we were before you started, the removal of the California state auditor, the list of cities considered to be financially high-risisk with several people taking credit for the success and achievement of the police department when you are in fact largely responsible for this achievement with your leadership and the selection of the previous and the current chief of police. a hysterically low homicide rate filling many many many citywide positions. The residents of Richmond, especially particularly Chester, but I'd say in full confidence all the residents in the city of Richmond, we thank you for your tireless leadership in your many contributions and we really, really, really, really hope you reconsider and stay at the helm because we need your leadership. Thank you very much.

Thank you. And the last speaker will be Tarnell Abbott. Tarnell, please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Hi, Tarnell Abbott. Uh, thank you. Um, wow. Well, you know, we got to hear how AI can be uh twisted to make Dr. Martin Luther King sound like he's trashing every liberal left anything. And we got to hear a lot from residents about justifiable complaints about not having enough literal boots on the ground for staff to make things happen in the city of Richmond. Later we'll talk more about AI. Um, but it is AI is an exist existential threat to our to us as human beings and we need to take it really seriously. We're not bystanders. We are living in an era that demands us to stand up and speak strongly. And you know, I I don't like to say this, but you have we have to listen to each other and we have to hold each other close. And I I love my city council members. I think you guys are doing a great job. I want all of you to win and keep fighting for us because that's what you're doing. And we need to stop the robotic factory for open AI that's planning to open because it'll kill us.

Thank you. And that was our last speaker. Okay. Our next item is approval of the consent calendar. I'm sorry, Mr. Mayor. Point of order. I think there's a confusion about why the 2 minutes have been reduced to 1 minute and 30 seconds. Going by your rules and procedures under open forum, the total number of speakers. I'm not objecting to it. I'm just saying it seems like people need some and I was I was I was jammed up for not using it before. So, I'm using it. Okay.

So, it wasn't corrected in our agenda. Mhm. Um, and what people don't know is that council can change the time for speakers at any time, but I'm going by what's in the rules and procedures, and I can read it to you if you if you like.

For the public, you may want to because it seems like some speakers have questions and procedures. The amount of time allotted to individual speaker shall be determined based on the number of persons requesting to speak during this item. Let's see. The allotted time for each speaker will be as follows. 15 or fewer speakers a maximum of 2 minutes. 16 to 24 speakers a maximum of a minute and a half. And 25 or more speakers a maximum of one minute. So, thank you. That's we we've actually been very generous with the two minutes.

Good to know. Thanks. Where was I? So I will motion. I I move the the consent calendar. Second. Have a second. Okay. Council member Brown. Yes. Council member Bana. Yes. Council member Jimenez. Yes. Council member Wilson. Yes. Council member Zapeda. Yes. Vice Mayor Robinson. Yes. And Mayor Martinez. Yes. The vote is unanimous.

Okay. Our next item under new business, item P1. And just one second. Okay. That item is to receive a report on revenue enhancement and financing options to support advanced life support first responder services and fire station upgrades and replacements and provide direction to the city manager on preferred revenue and financing pathways including whether to proceed with preparation for potential November 2026 funding measure. Deputy City Manager Maste, can you please um ask Emily to join us? I believe she's meeting with a colleague on another finance matter in the Shimada room. Um KCRT, can you please put up the slide deck? Um this evening we're joined by um Supervisor Joya. So after uh city staff make their presentation um we'd like to ask Supervisor Joya to provide some remarks um regarding ALS. We really appreciate his leadership and partnership um with Contraosta County and um we will need to uh provided the city council wants to continue moving forward, we will need to work with supervisor Joya uh EMS as well as um Contraosta County to move um this effort forward. Next slide. By way of background, um we did come to the city council previously um a couple of times to provide updates. And so what we're doing tonight is reporting back on our findings. Um we want to make sure

that as the city council is dealing with a host of um competing uh requests for funding that we try to deploy and seek uh revenue enhancements uh where it may be appropriate. in additioning to, as I mentioned previously, continuing to partner with the county to explore um revenue options. And so with that, um I will turn it over to Chief uh Osario to assist with uh commencing the presentation. He'll cover the first couple of slides and then we'll hand it over to um finance director uh Combmes. Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor Martinez and members of the council. Uh, for the record, Erin Oorio, fire chief of your Richmond Fire Department. I'm accompanied by the finance director Emily Combmes. And, um, as the city manager mentioned, at the end, we will have a few comments provided to us by Supervisor Joya. Um, who like to speak about maybe possible funding assistance. Uh tonight staff will be presenting the revenue enhancements and financing recommendations to support the implementation of the ALS program or paramedic program. Uh and this is also is tied in or will be linked to the need for fire station upgrades and replacements. Uh this presentation was a coordination between the finance department, the fire department, uh city manager's office um and then also some outside stakeholders such as board supervisors um and uh contraosta uh confire. I just wanted to reiterate some of the important aspects of this ALS program. Um I think it's important that um we don't lose sight of why we are actually looking at this. Um, so just a few of the points that we brought out in the past. I think number one will be that uh the fire department, you'll see the figure just as in the brochure earlier, responded to over 15,000 emergency incidents last year. Um, what it doesn't show is that over 8,000 of those are were EMS incidents. Now granted, not all 8,000 of those are ALS uh responses. Some of them could be handled at their low lower acuity, but the overwhelming majority of those are. And so what this program means is that we have the opportunity to provide a higher level of medical service than we currently do, emergency medical service to a large segment of the population that is utilizing the 911 system. And that will make a difference. Having paramedics on

scene within the first four minutes matters when you are in cardiac arrest. It matters when you sustain major traumatic injuries in a vehicle accident. It matters when you're experiencing a stroke or a diabetic emergency. The those are treatments. Those are direct uh directly related to a higher level of care where we could provide that care sooner and have uh improved outcomes for the patients. And that's really what this program is about is a benefit to the community. Um you secondly we would we are the last agency in the county that isn't paramedic. So it would bring us up not only to alignment with our neighboring agencies within the county um but it is industry standard and we are one of the last agencies in the Bay Area that is not paramedic. So um it is um it's the standard we need to try to achieve. Um we also have this compounded by the issue of a lack of sufficient health care in West Contraosta County. Um many members of the community have to utilize 911 as part of their health care um system because they do not have another option. Um and so it allows us to provide to play a role a positive role um in trying to at least make a small difference in that in that issue. Um, and lastly, I think it's important to point out that this program does align with the values and the policy direction that the council has established about developing programs that improve the health outcomes of the community and improve public safety. So, I just wanted to make sure um, you know, we re reiterate those aspects and I think you're already on slide two. Um so in brief summary the background of the issue in January this year uh we presented to you um basically the the

progress we've made towards developing um the program. Um sorry here I lost my place. Um at that time we presented a the staff with the preliminary plan. Um right now it can't be a detailed plan just because we have we are waiting for the funding. And so at that time we presented a preliminary planning level cost estimate based on um on the numbers we had and also on the projections of the infrastructure needs that were tied into the paramedic program. In addition, the city identified significant capital needs when we when we made that presentation that included the replacing of certain fire stations, upgrades, um and all of these would were going to support the ALS service delivery. Um at the end of that meeting, um the city council directed staff to return with a revenue enhancement and financing options presentation. and those that presentation was supposed to include options to support both the paramedic program long-term and the infrastructure needs that we had presented. So at this point I'll pass it over to Emily to uh discuss the financing options.

Thank you and good evening. Um next slide please KCRT. Um so this slide is meant to provide an overall context for the scale of the program. So the 20.5 million reflects the five-year planning estimate that was presented in January and when annualized that equates to roughly about 4.1 million per year. But I want to emphasize that this is a planning level estimate. That is the estimate that we used when we approached um SEI consulting group to help us um come up with some revenue enhancement ideas. So that's that's the figure we're using. Um but those costs will be refined as we move forward. So most importantly um what has become clear since January is the scale of the capital investment needed to support this program particularly around fire station infrastructure which we'll talk a little bit about tonight. Next slide. So across West County there's a strong history of voter supported funding for emergency medical services. So for example the healthc care district passed partial tax measures that generated millions um annually to support those services. So that was through measures D and J which were approved in 2004 and 2011. Um but when the hospital ultimately closed um the residents of San Pablo then passed measure K which was a quarter cent sales tax to support emergency services. Um and that has no sunset. Um so basically um this gives us a good sense of how neighboring communities have approached like similar funding challenges and also the community willingness to invest in emergency care. So with that context we'll walk through some electionbased revenue tools that are available to us. Next slide please. Selection based options include tools like parcel taxes, special taxes, and partial taxes are a type of special tax. Um, general obligation bonds and benefit

assessments. So staff with the support of SEI consulting group um is evaluating what a potential November 2026 ballot measure could look like, including polling and community outreach in the coming months. Um, so just to give a sense of scale, um, Richmond has about 32,000 taxable parcels. So depending on the rate, a parcel tax could generate roughly 1.6 million at the $50, um, per parcel and up to about 4.9 million at the $150 per parcel. That's an annual amount. So the main takeaway is that these voter approved tools can generate meaningful ongoing revenue. um which is important given the scale of both um the service and the facility needs um that we'll be needing for the implementation of um a successful ALS program. That said, these are not the only options. So um we looked at additional funding approaches that don't require um voter approval. Next slide, please. So, I'll say complementing emphasizing complementing election-based tools because these are um often tools used by um agencies with ALS programs to recover some of their costs. It's a complement because they do not come anywhere close to recovering all the costs for ALS. So, they complement them. Uh so, a first responder service fee could help recover a portion of those ALS response costs. Um the other thing is this is something we do annually anyways but um just reviewing our public safety fee schedules just to make sure that they're updated um on a regular cost of service basis ensuring that fees remain aligned with the actual program costs. In some cases um administrative or regulatory fees tied to the program oversight may also be appropriate. Um so all of these approaches just help relieve um or

reduce reliance on the general fund. Um although these fee based and cost recovery options do not generate enough revenue um on their own to sustain the full ALS program or any major capital improvements. Next slide please. So capital financing pathways. So preliminary facility evaluations indicate that we have several fire stations that require significant upgrades or or full replacement which were discussed back in January. Um, traditional voter approved tools such as general obligation bonds or GOBS, partial taxes and benefits assess assessments are commonly used to fund these types of co cattle projects. Um, the city also has some non-election financing options which includes the lease revenue financing or coops. Um, and those sort of provide flexibility to phase projects over time um, and utilize temporary facilities sort of as needed. All right, next slide, please. So, given the scale of the operational and capital needs with the ALS program, we're recommending continuing development of an election-based revenue strategy as the primary path forward. So next steps would include conducting polling and public opinion outreach, uh refining specific revenue measure options, and aligning potential funding with ALS operational requirements and our fire station um capital priorities. So this preparation um would help position um the city council and the city for a potential decision on advancing a November 2026 ballot measure. And that concludes my presentation.

Good evening, Mayor Council. I'm John Joya. I just um plan to add just a few words um for you to consider as you're looking at next steps with regard to financing. And I want to first start by thanking all of you for your leadership in moving forward to implement uh an engine-based paramedic system and your staff for working on that. You all know and the reason you're doing this is that every minute counts. I know this personally in my family. Um, in 1987, my father at the age of 58 was walking his dog um in front of his house in Richmond, suffered classic cardiac arrest um and uh by the time the ambulance arrived um uh and revived him, he had suffered pretty severe brain damage and was in a coma for 10 days at Brookside Hospital and died. Had he been revived just a few minutes earlier and not suffered brain damage, he would have probably lived. Th that's the classic case. There's others where getting a paramedic on scene makes a difference and saves a life. Um, so I appreciate I know I've been in some conversations with your with your fire chief and city manager and also with our EMS director about a possible opportunity to explore with our EMS agency some funding opportunity which I think is important as you consider uh what amount to set a a ballot measure because the more we could reduce what you seek from voters the better, right? So, um, here's the opportunity. Um, Richmond is the, um, only jurisdiction in the county that has a faster response time because of the fact

you do not have paramedics on your fire engine. Right now, um the county confire and AMR partnership through the EMS agency um provide ambulance service and transport and the standard is 90% response within 11 minutes and 45 seconds. I advocated many years ago for a faster response time for Richmond because you do not have paramedics on the fire engine because typically a fire engine shows up a little before the ambulance. And of course if there's a paramedic on the fire engine, you're going to get a paramedic on scene to triage a patient and then um the ambulance arrives, continues to provide care and transports. Because Richmond has EMTs and not paramedics, we have a faster response time just in Richmond, 10 minutes, so a minute 45 seconds faster. And the purpose is to get a paramedic on site from the ambulance sooner. It takes more resources and more money to deploy more to deploy these um the ambulance more ambulances and personnel to meet the 10-minute deadline. So we are again we are be we are going out soon with an RFP on ambulance services um which we're required to do and as you move forward if you implement enginebased paramedic what that would allow our EMS agency to do is then change Richmond's response time to be the same as San Pablo Elserto all the other parts of the area to 11 minutes 45 and actually the ambulances are essentially arriving faster, but those are the standards and there's a penalty if you don't meet those. And by shifting from 10 minutes to 11:45,

that means the EMS agency does not have to deploy as many resources, personnel, and ambulances, which is a savings. And I've I think what we want to explore, and this would take some discussion, is an opportunity to shift some of that savings to help Richmond with its um implementation of ALS, if you sort of get my drift here, is that because it will cost less to meet the 11:45 standard instead of 10 minutes, you will now have a paramedic which can get there faster and there will be less need to have as many ambulance resources deployed and to try to take that some of that savings for Richmond. So, I think that's an opportunity of having some discussion with your fire chief with our EMS director um and to look at that in some language uh in an RFP that would go out within a few months uh for ambulance service. So, I just wanted to note that which may mean that when you decide to go to the ballot, if you decide to do that, you may we may want to sort this out so you understand what piece you can get from that as you look at doing a ballot measure. So, I just wanted to I think there's an opportunity for a partnership on that because it's a positive good thing to have enginebased paramedic. And the last comment I will make is I know you have an estimate on what the cost is at 4.1 million a year. What I'd suggest you do as well is work with Elsto Fire, Confire, other agencies to look at what their experience here in this county has been to implement and the cost for ALS and maybe that'll allow you to fine-tune your cost estimate. Um, and and maybe it's less u which will help you as you make that decision. So, I wanted to add to that to your presentation with that

since it's an additional potential financing um opportunity to help assist in this important transition.

Thank you, Supervisor Joy. Uh he brings out a good point is that there's there's not going to be just one funding source that's going to cover everything here. Um, you know, we are looking at there's measure H funds that we would get. Um, there could be fees that we charge. Um, there could be pass through uh support from the county contract. Um, the there's a number of places we're trying to get the amount of money we need to do this this program. Um, and so not there's not one solution that potentially solves them all. um other than the the um the voter initiatives that we're talking about would make the biggest impact, but we are looking at other ways to supplement that uh the funding for the program. I think right now if you have any questions or unless the city manager has comments, we have any questions, be happy to answer your questions. Our intention if uh this item is approved is to um work with the polling consultant to develop the questions um to share the information with the council to make sure that we get a sense of if the if there is an appetite to move forward uh with a parcel tax of some type and what uh services and or capital um or mix thereof would uh potentially do best. Um, as you are aware, we have um approximately a billion dollars worth of deferred capital needs. And so we're looking this at this as an opportunity to potentially assist uh with um essentially three uh new firehouses and um and potentially on the service side as well. So, we want to see what what funds what what um pulls the best and then we'll we would want to come back to the city council with that information to help uh inform next steps and um also see uh how things are looking uh in

November. Right now, there are obviously a lot of other entities that have tax measures that they may be considering. Um, in the past, um, you know, people have, uh, when there are a host of things on the ballot, people do tend to focus on what is local because that is what they feel and touch and experience. Um, but we would bring all of that information back to the city council to make an informed decision. We just want you to to make sure you have options. Thank you. Before we go to questions from council, do we have public speakers?

Yes, we have one inerson speaker. There's anyone joining us online who would like to address the council on this item, please raise your hand at this time. And our inerson speakers, Irania Delamura,

press the button.

There you go. Hello, city council. Thank you so much for um having me today. Um also I wish you all all the luck in the world on your uh elections though I don't believe in luck but I still wish you luck since you believe in it. Um so for the ASL I think it's a good program. Um the only problem is I don't like taxes and I know that a parcel tax means I'm going to have to pay more money for my house. And in one year, you didn't explain what a parcel tax was, city manager. But for all of you that don't know anything about anything government, that means that you're going to pay more money to the city hall, and we're going to trust all of you to do what you're supposed to do with that money. Though, not to say that I don't trust any of you. I I think you did good this year, Eduardo. So, I trust you maybe a little bit more than people from the past. But, um, anyways, I don't want higher taxes. My taxes in one year raised $300. I was paying 2,700 for my house. Now I pay 3,60 something and it's not my house anymore. I had to give it away because I've had no money these last 5 years. So now I'm not a homeowner. But thank God I gave it to somebody in my family, right? But I don't want any more raise taxes. And if you're going to raise taxes, create more jobs. And you're not doing that. So don't raise taxes. Everyone in Richmond works in Oakland or San Francisco. There is no jobs out here. And if there is jobs, there have been jobs for people that have been living here for over 30 years and they've been having those jobs for over 20 years. There's no jobs for people my age. Okay? And it's not that's not okay. I worked in San Francisco for about 5, six, seven years. That was the only way I was able to buy a house. And I don't want my taxes raised. So y'all going to have to figure it out. I think the fire department is fast enough. Okay? The police officers are fast enough. I don't think you guys need any more money for anything else. Thank you very much. Also, I don't even need the doctors. I never get sick unless I get like jumped by a group of I've been jumped before by a group of black women and I've been jumped before by Hispanic

women. So unless something like that happens and I've been attacked by a dog. So unless something like that happens, I never call the fire department or the police. Thank you very much. That was our uh last inerson speaker. Now we'll move to the online speaker. We have one speaker and that speaker is Tarnell Abbott. Tail, please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Thank you. Um, I love the fire department. I love that they're around the corner from me. I love that uh if if I fall down and call them, they'll come and help me or or they'll give me first aid for whatever it is I need. Um, that said, I I my son actually was an EMT, not for the fire department. And and I've been treated by EMTs who were not part of the fire department. And I know that they get paid a whole lot less than fire department EMTs. And it um what we need is emergency services, emergency medical treatment from qualified people who have been trained and know how to save lives. And we need them immediately. Of course, the fire department will get there quicker than anybody else. they are well funded by our city or by our county departments. And I don't know how how to go forward on this issue, but there there is there's an there's an edge that the fire department has on any other EMTs and it's because they are already subsidized by our tax dollars. So, this is where I kind of run into hemming and hawing. And yeah, I I am a homeowner in the city of Richmond. I do pay my taxes and I do value my firefighters, but let's be really cautious about the real cost of what it means to have EMTs, whether they're firefighters or not. And

I I'm not weighing in one way or the other. I'm just being cautionary here. Thank you. Thank you. And that was our last speaker.

Thank you. Um I do have a question. Uh there there'll be an initial cost for the polling. Do you have any idea what that budget would be? We might have to bring that back. This is falling under a prior contract that you um approved back under that it was an SEI on call. So right now we're using the on call services. So when we will get we can get a better quote from them. Um but that's what it's falling under. So it's already we're already in contract with SEI Consulting Group. Oh, okay. Thank you.

Any other questions? Council Vice Mayor. Thank you for uh bringing the item forward. There's a few questions that I have just to better understand um what's going on. First is can you remind me of the current estimate for the renov you know renovations rebuilds of the three fire stations the capital funds

uh in January presented but that was including um I don't actually have the slides that were just for the temporary squad total though was about 100 million in between the replacements of 60 uh 41st and Clinton cutting station 63 in May alley uh with for renovations and the renovations of three fire stations to temporarily house the squads, right? And it was 100 million total for all of that. For all of that, I can get back to a an estimate now without the construction drawings and everything. So, prices always go up, but yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. But I can get back to you on there was a breakout of the three stations that were going to need to have some immediate work done to increase their capacity for staffing for the three squads and I don't remember what that was. I I couldn't get back to you on that. Thank you. And then the the next question is I I think um I don't want to make sure I'm not misunderstanding. I think what you're proposing is that there is some bond financing and then that we would pay off the bond through these revenue generating um mechanisms. Is that correct?

I are you referring to the lease revenue bonds that were described when we talked about the capital financing I'm assuming. Um correct um that is one of the financial tools that is available to us at a higher cost. Um so I mean that's that's kind of the downside of lease revenue bonds. It's not um you don't have to go to the voters. Um but the idea is that and I'll try to put this in like simple terms even though um you know you basically hand over like the rights of the property um or a a property. It's almost like collateral and then um the financing um authority then issues the bonds and we kind of pay it as a lease um over time.

And that's what you're proposing? Not necessarily. It's just um one of the the tools that we explored, but at this point I think we're in the very initial phases and we'd like to just do polling on the residents to see what they what the appetite would be as our

I guess the last thing is that I'm not really understanding is that even in the scenario where we're we're taxing parcels the most the it seems like you were saying that at $150 a parcel that we would generate possibly 4.9 million which is the operating costs of ALS but not the not the hund00 million in capital improvements.

Right? So the the 4.1 was really from it was from the operating forecast that we used in the in the January presentation which we used as sort of what what do you call the the estimating model that's what we turned over to SEI as a you know to look for means of financing that um but so I mean it could be but with a parcel tax you can use it for both operations and for capital. So, we're trying to find the best menu. Um, but we will be able to of financing options for both capital and operating um after after we can do some polling for our residents.

And so, just a quick question about so there was only one financing option which was this leasing thing or did I miss there another one? Um for well for capital cost you can use a parcel tax or you can you can use a lease revenue bond as well but there were others in there. Um Emily can you refer to the slide number and then we'll get KCRT. Absolutely. Yeah. Can we get it up on the because you kind of sped through them. I saw something about GO bonds but I didn't know what that was. And then what number is it? Um that's slide number seven. KCRT, can you please display slide number seven, please?

Okay, so yeah, this is Let me walk through this. So for the election-based options, there's the general obligation bonds. And for general obligation bonds, you can only fund capital um and that requires 55% approval um through an election. Those are the go bonds, general. Yes, that is only capital. the there is inherent flexibility in the parcel tax and that you could you have more flexibility. However, um that requires a twothirds um vote

and then finally the the fees option. I just make sure I understand that correctly. It's so somebody who is receiving ser life- saving services would get a bill for those services correct after they're done. It's done by numerous agencies around the Bay Area and the state. San Jose is one of the most recent ones that's done it. Napa City does it. Uh we believe started doing it. Um they all have different versions of it.

Um so I think San Jose's it's a flat fee that's charged to someone's insurance and they're not they don't go to the the resident and send them to collections. Let's say um a city like Napa City passed a tax and every city resident pays that tax. So they're not charged for services, but because they have a large tourist population that comes in and a lot of services are being utilized on tourists or non-residents, anybody who receives service in the city limits but isn't a hasn't doesn't have a a residency in the city gets a bill from the fire department for paramedic service. We would it these are uh bills strictly for EMS service not for coming to your house for a structure fire or something like that. It has to be related to EMS care only. Um other agencies um try to get a bill direct billing to the patient and the insurance company and I don't know how they handle it if someone can't pay if there's a hardship. Um so there's a lot of different versions of a fee. Um, but you don't see someone charge a fee and have a tax. You usually have one or the other or like Napa Cities where people who utilize the system that didn't don't pay taxes to get that improved service pay their share. Um, and for us, I think we looked at, you know, we have a lot of resources that are spent on accidents that on interstate 80, 580, Amtrak, BART. You have a lot of people that pass through Richmond that do utilize the system. So that type of model would probably be could be utilized here where if there was a tax to support paramedic service, we would also look at billing non-residents who don't pay the tax to keep it fair.

And last question is currently we charge people when the ambulance comes, right? Like they'll get an ambulance bill to their we don't charge. Well, they they are charged. They are charged by uh they receive a bill that says Confire on it, but it's from the alliance. It's from the AMR Confire um alliance, the service. Um and so it's the partnership. They do receive a bill. Um I don't know how they handle those bills as far as hardships or things like that, but I do know they receive a bill because we've received bills for our firefighters being transported too,

right? And so if if they're not if they're it would it be would it be possible that we're setting up a scenario where somebody would re receive that that ambulance bill if they don't have insurance I as well as as well as a bill for this ALS service that's in most cities they get two bills Napa City used to be Pioner's Ambulance now it's AMR they get a bill from AMR and they get a bill from Napa City if we utilize like currently charge people when the fire when the fire when the fire um fire. Yeah.

The only time we bill right now is for um specialized response such as hazmat response or if we have respond for um some sort of technical rescue or hazmat to an industrial site where there's um a business because those are services above and beyond. So that and those fees are based on the fee schedule. So you look at the fee schedule, it has a cost per uh engine company or different types of um staff that might respond. Those are the only times right currently that we uh bill for any type of service. We do not bill homes um for for any sort of EMS service. We don't bill anybody for structure fire response or wild wildland response or anything like that.

Can I add about that really important point? So the purpose of the bill ambulance bills and it's basically to the insurance company. It's to collect billing from the insurance company and um there's not a pursuit if it's an individual who doesn't have health insurance. So people who don't have health insurance um are really are not pursued. It's really a mechanism to build the insurance company. Yeah.

And if I may, uh Council Member Robinson, those are really good questions. Um before we could establish any fee, it would be just like we were um we presented to council a few weeks ago where um there was a consultant they there was a report completed. It indicate there's a justification for the fee based on the uh payment and the cost of the service for staff. So it would not be arbitrary. Um there would have to be a specific methodology and to comply with state law in our municipal code. Um, and so what we're trying to do is put together a menu of options to help the city council um, potentially fund this without um, draining one specific bucket of existing revenue. Um, and so the way that we see this coming together is through a compilation of different funding sources.

Council member Bunn. Um, thank you for the presentation. Um, I'm sorry that I'm still confused on basic concepts. Are we going to fund this $4.5 million along with hundred million or they're separate?

So, can I try that? So, council member Bonnet, what we're trying to do is we're trying to um uh so basically think about it uh a lot of times when we're working on projects, we think about sources and uses of funds. So there'll be one um column where we'll list all the um the sources, right? And so what Emily was describing and supervisor Joya and the chief are different funding options, right? And then we'll have uses and some of the uses would be, oh, we need to buy equipment, we need to pay personnel, we need to renovate fire stations, oh, we need to build new fire stations, right? So what we're trying to do is put together these these two lists of of of items, right? So you have not decided how to go about it yet or you have

um we also have to understand what is the um funding what are the funding constraints right so because this is a heavy lift right and you have a number of things that you've asked us as staff to work on we're trying to identify other potential funding options so that you can also keep moving forward with some of your other policy um direction and needs in the built environment. Okay. So, it's an evolving process of making a decision. Okay. So,

we're not asking you to make a permanent decision tonight. We're just asking that we continue to move the process forward to see if the residents have an appetite for this uh potential funding source, right, in terms of a a potential parcel tax. Based on that information, then the city council can elect if you want to proceed forward in November or not. But we just want you to have that information so you can make an informed decision. And then this may also impact how you look at the fiscal year 2526 budget and the 5-year CIP. So if you want to go on the ballot by when should we have decided? We um we will want to decide before you go on your recess.

Okay. Thank you. I have a question for um Supervisor Joy. Thank you very much for coming here. Thank you for initiating it and sharing your father's story. Very powerful and so true. So we do need it. My question is, can Measure X help us?

Measure X money is already allocated. Um, and given the federal cuts, which may result in a billion dollar deficit to our health system, I think if we're going to be looking at honestly reallocating any Measure X dollars, it' probably go to keep health clinics and hospital and and health care to people. So, um, right now all the Measure X money is, as I say, is allocated. there's some unspent dollars. If we again, not a lot, but if we make some decisions, it's likely going to go to backfill the federal cuts depending what happens also with our sales tax that's on the ballot. So, um there's really no Measure X money for other things.

And I assume there's no estate money trickling down for any of this, right? For yours or for us?

For us. Um yeah, I'm I mean reason I asked because uh there's been requests to the state to backfill some of the federal health care losses which we don't know what's going to happen on that and if they're going to you know provide any local help and if they do it's not going to be enough. I have not heard of heard of any money uh for this. I I will I will say, you know, one possib I know you you're talking about putting a measure on. Um there's been some discussion around whether we should put our Measure X EMS parcel tax out for countywide renewal with an increase. That that's a flat amount. Measure H. Did I say that right? Yeah. Measure H. um which was passed decades ago with no CPI inflator and it's a very small amount per parcel and there's been some discussion whether to go out countywide to extend um well it doesn't need to be extended but to raise measure H parcel tax with maybe a CPI inflator which would bring more money into the EMS system. We haven't had any recent discussion, but that's ideas out there. Um, and uh that if that did get increased, it would potentially provide some more funding to cities like Richmond on EMS.

So, that's something um I wouldn't mind us looking at. That would take a two-thirds vote countywide, but it'd be specifically for EMS. Um, thank you. But we cannot count on it yet. So, I have some um Thank you very much. I have some quick questions. Um, so tourists in Napa financially are at a different estate than us Richmond residents. Uh, do we have any statistics about how many people in Richmond actually do have insurance and what type of insurance they have?

We do know from our health and all policies work that we have a very significant uh, residually u uninsured population. That is also why this is extremely important especially with the cuts that are that supervisor Joya mentioned because um we're expecting that the number of people who are going to be uninsured is going to increase exponentially and so if people are residually uninsured we want to make sure that uh if they do have an emergency we can get them to uh an emergency center soon. we we will um uh try to work with Contraosta County Health Services and provide that data, but it is something that we've historically worked with them to look at. Um but it's also why we have community partners like Lifelong and so forth in our community to help um and the Contraosta Health Center

and and you could structure a fee that does something similar to the approach we've taken, which is basically go after the insurance companies, right? I mean, that's sort of the revenue that comes in. So, you know, you could in your structure come up with a policy that sort of tries to um um exempt or help those who don't have health insurance because that's a concern.

If I can add to that too is that um traditionally Medicare, medical only re um refund or reimburse a fixed amount regardless of the resources or the cost of the incident. Um I don't know what the current numbers are. I know at one point it was only about $300 per incident. And we can't lose sight of the fact that we're talking about this because of a lack of healthcare in West County. We're not talking about insured individuals that are actually utilizing and need the service the most. We're talking about individuals who are underinsured or not insured that utilize the system. So, we can't have a funding model that's based upon building insurance companies and think we're going to have a huge return because that's not the population that's actually utilizing the services the most. Individuals who have adequate health insurance and access to health care don't utilize the 911 system as much. That's the data is out there on that. So, we can get stuck in this talk about funding, but we have to remember who's utilizing our system and how are they are they insured or how are they insured? because it's going to be pennies on a dollar when it comes to the investment of the service versus what we're going to get back.

True. Thank you very much. And I just wanted to give you a heads up. I received um emails from two residents about West Contra Costa wastewater management. I guess that they're uh increasing the rates by 72% over the next four years. If I hear about that and I'm not affiliated with that district, it means the res is too much for the residents. So, we may want to consider as the city manager said what's coming up in what and the a question on this side before I uh move on. There was a picture of the helicopter who has the helicopter for emergency lift in the county. Do we have that access? I think I've heard in the news sometimes we have it, but just wanted to make sure it is a possibility. It's a county resource just like an ambulance. Those are private companies, some of which are uh so there just like the alliance with Confire and AMR, there's an uh a partnership with Confire and um Reach Medical, which is one provider. Um there's also other providers. There's a new provider trying to come into the county. They have to bid that service to the county just like the ambulance companies do. So, um, most of these providers in Northern California are private companies. They're not public agencies. Got it.

They partner with public agencies to establish their funding. But you don't see in Northern California the same thing you see in Southern California. In Southern California, Santa Barbara, Orange County, LA County, LA City, they have their own aviation division. They own the helicopters. Up here in Northern California, all of the medical aviation assets are owned by private companies that provide services and bid the contract to serve a county uh service. So, when we ask for a helicopter through our dispatch center, they're on a rotation. The next one up gets called. It's typically coming out of conquered and it's typically some uh affiliated with the Reach um medical group.

Thank you. And how many minutes does it take right now for fire engines? I believe it's 8 minutes something, right? The average time for firefighters. Most calls in in the downtown area of the city, we're there in 4 minutes or less. And the outline areas such as in your district uh usually about 6 minutes. We've passed uh last year a response standard which is part of our EMS contract to receive measure H funds. we had to establish and you guys as a body had to adopt it which was a six-minute response time uh for 90% of our calls.

Excellent. That's very good. Um so one more question for the finance. Is it possible to tax exponentially? It has to be linearly by law like people who have more pay more or we can make exclusions. So, for example, or reductions for um certain categories um and so we can explore that with the consultant and bring that back for city council consideration and uh model out the fiscal impact of those things. Okay. And then also uh consider um having uh some sort of CPI index.

Okay. Thank you. My last question, you said something about admin fee, legally permissible and cooper just bonds or what does admin fee mean? It was on page six of this. I believe that was in reference to what we can charge.

There's a there's an ad. So you part of the fee in some cases isn't just for the firefighter that's on scene in your house, the crew. There's overhead that right like say we're going to hire an EMS division chief. we're going to hire a clinical care manager who oversees quality control. Those are admin aspects of a EMS program. Certain in certain instances, small segments of that cost can be added to the overall cost of services because it's all linked to the service. Okay. Thank you very much. I'm done with my questions. Council member Jimenez,

thank you for the presentation and all the work that you had put into this. Um I I I have some clarification because I still confuse about uh the capital improvements versus the ongoing cost of this program. Um so are you saying that the operation cost is 4.1 million every year or that just So no not it's not initially there's that fiveyear implementation period right so if you remember the the hybrid model that um we had presented um it involved hiring basically additional 20 employees to initially get the program off the ground right with medic squads um and that was in addition to our current fire department staffing these would be paramedics on the squads. And that was the the phase one while we trained our own firefighters, hired new paramedic firefighters, transitioned some of those, excuse me, um, single role paramedics into firefighter paramedics over the following two years with the end goal that our staffing numbers would actually be the same they are today, just everybody would have a higher level of medical training. Right? So, it was never the long-term plan to raise the FTE count of the fire department by 22 people. Um, so there's that initial spike in implementation costs. Now, the matrix study that was the original study, this was based on for the feasibility of whether or not we should do this. They had a very low estimate of after year five, once we have paramedics on a fire engine and you've gotten back down to your normal

staffing that you were pre-program, they estimated between 600 700,000 a year in additional operating costs from today versus today. That was actually a very low estimate. I think we believe it's closer to a million to a million and a half a year to keep the program going just because of the increase in cost of just operations. So the other portion of that is to help pay for the capital improvements needed to keep well we need them regardless of the ALS program but a number of those are directly related to rolling out that paramedic program because of um more equipment aging infrastructure that needs that needs to be replaced anyways. Um so it's a combination of both. So, if you're looking at just what the paramedic program would cost ongoing after we level out and return to our normal staffing, somewhere between 1 and 1.5 most likely is where that continuing operating cost would be. So let me just so with the 4.1 millions and the this is going to be the cost each year for five years. Is that

No, that was just kind of the what SEI used that we broke out in the presentation in January. There are certain years where we only it's only $300,000 more because we're only hiring one position new and some equipment. Other years it might be $2 million or one 1.5 million because we have to purchase a number of new vehicles and we have to send some people to training or other years it might be a million dollars because we're going to hire 19 people that year. So we had broken it down in those original presentations if you remember I broke it down by fiscal year because we looked at what can we achieve in a fiscal year. Okay, this next year we can recruit an EMS division chief and a clinical care manager and begin ordering apparatus that is going to be $800,000 let's say right so total over five years it was 20 million but it wasn't equally staggered over five years because some years we were going to have a lot of activity a lot of onboarding or a lot of purchasing and other years we weren't. So this is but this is for the staffing and the capital cost of $100 million. When what year that will be needed and are we going to need all of that at once or do you have any

there that was kind of goes back to Vice Mayor Robinson's question. There was a portion of that $100 million in in capital improvement projects for the fire department that had to happen to do implement phase one because you have three fire stations that have to we increase we have to increase the capacity to house the new squads and two additional personnel over three shifts. And so a portion of that a small portion of that was to do some minor renovations and remodeling to accommodate the staff. The one the largest uh portion or component that we hadn't decided on yet was one of those fire stations that we needed to put the squad one of the squads at is at capacity. So we had to have a decision whether or not we were going to um lease or purchase a temporary fire station and house the squad there initially until we transitioned into phase two. Um, and that one was linked with some of our capital improvement projects because if we rebuild station 66 on 41st in Clinton,

they have to move out of that firehouse to do that project. And so we would lease this temporary fire station potentially and we would get two uses out of it because we would have to lease a fire station, temporary firehouse to relocate the crew anyways. So we could actually get two uses out of one lease if we put that station at the training grounds. You could put a squad there temporarily that we can't fit at Crescent Park and we can move the crew from 66 while they rebuild their firehouse there. So, we would have that expense either way. So, but we don't have the exact years of when that happened. So we can have a flowchart of when that money for the capital like

well 66 is already out for um RFQ right now for for design for a replacement for station 66 because you got to uh keep in mind that station 66 and on 41st in Clinton and station 63 on Valley View were the two first projects that we had put in as a fire department for for replacement regardless of before we even talked talked about paramedic because they are in the worst condition. One is in the worst condition, the other one has significant uh foundation issues. So those were in the rotation already and now we kind of mesh on top of that the paramedic program. Um but if we had never talked about paramedic, those two were already going out and beginning the process. And this year what was budgeted was uh securing a firm to do con construction and design or design um and construction management I believe and then with the thought that next hopefully we would have a funding source identified for the 2728 fiscal year to break ground and begin the construction. But that's separate from the the paramedic program. And so the that was part of the $100 million that was presented and those in in that presentation last time, but it's only the first I believe the estimate for that was around 30 million for that fire station I think. So potentially you would only and same thing with that you wouldn't need all 30 million in one fiscal year. It would be in the phases that the construction was happening. And that the idea is that's part of that like will be covered by a a a tarsel um tax parcel parcel tax. Um we are thinking about is that correct?

Correct. Yeah. I definitely So the 4.1 I'm going to try this again is straight from the presentation from January which was the operating costs. um we needed to be able to have a figure to work with SDI on some initial ideas for what we could potentially do and then that's when we brought in the capital cost. So the 4.1 was really just them as the chief um mentioned the total amount we had on that slide divided by five years was 4.1. That's that's what it was. Just a just a planning estimate at that time.

Okay. Um so I think we so you will need to make sure that um what we go to the borders is not only for the ongoing cause but for the capital cost or you are thinking maybe there will be a ban initiative for that like what

um both right so we want to see what the voters would be interested in funding right are they interested in funding both operations and capital or do they have a preference of one of the two and depending on what pulls well then that's what we would you know confer with the city council about and then that would impact what the overall sort of sources and uses of funds may be for the overall program. Um and so yes in addition to having a parcel tax we will probably need to do a bond issuance that could be funded by the revenue coming in from the parcel tax. the ongoing payment could be because then you you could do other bonds for other capital needs that the city may have, for example, like the MLK center or things of that nature. So, we're we're just trying to make sure you all have all the tools. Yes, there is a a giant flowchart that has this all figured out, but we also need to be um until we actually get the the architects hired and onboarded and the construction documents generated. There could be, you know, right now, like for example, the facilities needs assessment, those are in progress. So once the facilities needs assessment is done, then we'll really know, okay, definitively, yes, you know, the Clinton station's got to go right away, right? Because you'll have the report that will help inform um the council's policy direction.

Okay. Thank you, Council Member Wilson.

Thank you. Um most of my questions have been asked but I'm just going to restate what I'm understand what I think I understand just to make sure I'm on the right track. So um you will be taking a look at uh at cons you know asking voters to contribute maybe via parcel tax maybe through these go bounds or something both towards the ongoing the operating expenses I should say for that first five years of the project and also some portion of $und00 million worth of capital expenses. So there's going to be a sort of research to find out if there's an appetite on voters. So So that's correct. Um the $100 million figure for the capital projects, if I'm understanding it correctly, that includes capital improvements related to ALS, but also pre-existing capital needs of the fire department. Is that correct? Okay. So, so like if we if someone magically came and gave us $100 million today, we would have enough to pay for all of the capital.

Uh all of the capital. I wish they would. Yes. Yeah. Right. Well, what about tomorrow? One of the things I've learned is that we don't need to have the hundred million all at the same time, you know, like that's because the projects aren't going to happen all at the same time. But I if I hear you um because one of my concerns is that al although I I support having you know a a good ALS program. I know there's sort of a lot of I guess deferred maintenance and also like like critical needs in some of these fire stations. And so I don't want us to move forward on ALS at the expense of of these other CIP uh projects that have been sitting from what I understand for a while. But I is that should I not I don't need to be like there's a path for addressing those.

I think this is a really critical opportunity for us to do both. Okay. Because it it would create positive momentum to give us a definitive timeline to to to do both. So improve service and improve the living conditions for our firefighters. Okay, that's great. And then my last question is in terms of what you're asking us. So we're receiving a report tonight. We've heard the report and then you're asking to us to make a recommendation, but if I'm hearing, if I understand it correctly, you're not asking us to recommend parcel tax for, you know, no, you're you're basically what you're looking for us to recommend is please go out and hire or, you know, use somebody to come back with us with a more specific recommendation and

move forward with the polling to see if it's something that can be Yeah. Okay. And since it's a short window of time if we want to make that November, you know, 2026, we we got to start tomorrow. Okay. So, so that's the re that's the recommendation you're looking for us to make is go forth and poll. Correct. Okay. Do you want can I make that motion now? Or are we done with a question? Sorry. No, we have uh council member Sepa.

Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, thank you for the presentation. Um, so I'm looking at the presentation from last uh from January. So I in there you you divided it up between current facility upgrade cost and you've got fire station 6268 and the training tower and that was between 2.6 or 2.7 million to uh 3.5 million. And then replacement cost was station 63, 66, and 67 for 98 million or 100 million. So the 100 million that we're discussing, this would just be for the replacement is what I'm hearing. Are we doing anything for the upgrades?

The the upgrades, I believe the 100 million was supposed to in it does include that 2.5 because those are estimates. So that was the answer. Uh, Vice Mayor Robinson, when you asked what are the costs for the specific to the phase one paramedic from that presentation, it was North Richmond Hilltop and a temporary fire station at the training center. The estimate was somewhere between 2.7 2.5. That is so we can get phase one off the ground in the if if that was the model that we end up having the funding to to go after. Um and then the remainder that was taken off the 100 million. The remainder of that was the estimate to replace station 66 on Clinton, station 67 on cutting and the open-ended unsure exactly what it's going to the scope is for 63 on Valley View for the foundation.

And if I may, council members, these orders, these numbers were all very rough order of magnitude. They were um based on uh when the report was provided then um estimates for fire facilities but they were not based on for example the specific topography of an area like for example if it has a low water table and so maybe it has to have a different foundation. So all those sorts of things would um come to light once we're further down the process. So these these numbers I just don't want the council to think like these are the final numbers. These are very rough um estimates. And so as the process moves forward with the um public works department and their um construction uh management staff and and the engineers, we would continue to provide updates on the on the costs um based on uh the needs of the department.

Thank you. So it so it will be over hund00 million for both when I add up the replacement cost and the upgrade costs. Just kind of putting it out there from the presentation from January. And also just now noticing uh station 61. Is that a station we're going to do anything to? It's not in either the replacement or upgrade list.

Uh negative. It was not part of the initial capital improvement um list. It's actually the only fire station that's had seismic upgrades in the entire um fleet of fire stations in the city. um and has had some renovations. So, no, it was not on the list to be um worked on. Not every fire station in the city was on that list. We focused on the um priorities, the main ones that are in the oldest and in the worst condition or the ones such as 63 that we are concerned about how they would perform in the event of like a major earthquake or something like that. thinking that chief what I had heard and maybe I misheard but that the seismic improvements were done to I would call it the garage where the the the trucks are stored but the seismic from what I understand the seismic retrofit didn't happen to the dormitories is that correct

as far as I understand that is correct I don't know what seismic standard the station was built to um but I do know that the retrofit was done for the apparatus If I can just ask and I don't know how much more it will be for that one there, but I I have somewhat joked before that that station there in case of a big earthquake, they might need to call 911 to get help if they're in the dormatory uh when the big earth big earthquake hits. So, we might want to look to see um if there's any how much more it might take to retrofit just the dormatory since we already got the other part. So, just a thought there. And then I'm looking at the um draft ALS personnel cost estimates and then the total I know we keep going back and forth on the 4.1 million. So it is 4.1 million for every year for 5 years for a total of a little bit over 20 million and that includes the 19 paramedic EMS division chief EMS manager paramedic supplies admin tuition training and vehicles. That's still the same number

and the same stuff. Correct. That's the planning estimate we used.

Thank you. And then do we have and I know that that that the Supervisor Joya just uh uh reached out to us recently regarding the potential funds from the county. Can we potentially have another and I'm sure as we dig through the numbers some more, but we'll have to see what it would that will potentially do to the numbers. uh because we might not need to go after so much and I would just wondering how much more that would be and if we can have another update somehow that give us those numbers. Uh I think that's going to require a lot of discussion with the uh county EMS agency and with Confire and AMR which are the partnership in the alliance that provide ambulance service. Um, and I also think that um, so I I don't think we can come up with a number right now. I would like to keep in mind or have everybody keep in mind is that other than measure H, no other fire agency in the county receives uh, funds in continuously every year. So I I don't know if how long we would rely on those funds. Um I I I know if I was Confire or if I was Elserto, I would start to ask after a few years, well what about our money? We provide paramedic service. So um I think it's a great way to um maybe um complete implementation, but we'd have to have discussions with a lot of other stakeholders in the county before we know how long we would have access to those funds.

Yeah. Yeah, just I just trying to make sure that as we go out there to ask the voters to approve and as we're doing the survey as well, I think the survey is going to ask, are you willing to pay 50 bucks in your parcel or 150 bucks in your parcel? And if this number brings that down, then I think it might be a easier sale as well. And Supervisor Joy, I think you had something there.

I I was going to say, so measure X measure X, measure H is a is a different path than the ambulance contract, right? So there is measure H which is not a lot of money. You know is there an opportunity to allocate more out of measure H if Richmond gets paramedics? That's a that's a discussion to have. Um and um and the other option is do we look at raising the measure H assessment and bring more money in the issue of the ambulance contract. you know, we don't exactly know uh with, you know, what the additional resources are that what the savings would be to go back down to, uh, you know, or go to 11:45 instead of 10 minutes. I have heard ranges. I've heard ranges of around 1 mill. It could be $1 million or not. Just to give you a scale, it's not like it's off the charts, but the savings could be around a million dollars. Um, you know, the good news as I listen to this presentation is your ongoing cost past five years is is this million to a million and a half, which is a much more reasonable sort of uh I think goal to meet. And so there's two questions. How do you come up with that short-term money for the first five years, but then beyond that, the incremental cost because you're not like we don't hire additional firefighters. we're just paying more and training them to paramedic standards. So, if if it's a million to a million and a half a year, that's a much more affordable long-term number. So, how do we get Richmond through that first five years um and then get to that year five? But you again options measure H um ambulance contract it's going to take time to have some discussion about that which may mean those issues don't get resolved before August when you have to go to the ballot. Um so the question is do you go to the ballot now? Do you go in the

future? But it's going to take a while to get some of these issues resolved presum the the the ballot measure in a way where it gives us a range and we don't overcolct

um based on uh council members based on the current interest rates um and the amount that will we we will need cumulatively over the five years to complete the fire stations. Like some of the other council members have noted, we won't need the entire $100 million all upfront at once. But concurrently, the way that you know we have mapped this out, it appears as though once our personnel costs hopefully start to subside a bit, we'll also be having an increase in the amount that we need to pay for the debt service on the renovated um and new fire stations. So that's why um to the extent to which um you know interest rates remain you know relatively high um that the the four plus or minus million um we will still need some general fund dollars to to make this work.

We can we calculate how long is there I didn't see anything about a sunsetting of the tax. Is there a thought about how long so the voters know that we're going to be taxing for 10 years, 20 years?

We're we're happy to have um SCI uh send out a correspondence to the to the city council with uh these details. Um you know, we are um really concerned about making sure that we have a viable financial strategy to to move this forward. And so if the council is interested in in having um uh a sunset, we can certainly ask them to include that in the polling. Um but at this juncture um you know our um the the costs for this are are significant. Um, and so, you know, these stations have been unfortunately not upgraded for for many, many decades, and we we want to make sure that we can do everything we can to to get them upgraded.

Yeah. No, I agree. I think we need to upgrade them ASAP. The the the community needs them. Um, and then my last question is in regards to the parcels. So on the the staff agenda it says 32,683 taxable parcels and and similar uh train of thought here than then council member uh figuring out a way to make it equitable because the the I'm assuming that a single family resident would be paying the same amount as a as a multifamily residency. So an apartment building with 20 apartments is paying the same thing. Is that a correct understanding?

I don't have the answer to that, but we can get that from SEI, but it would be a flat amount. Whether or not that would be the same amount applied to multifamily, I'm not quite sure, but we can get we can get those details. I mean, it's in the how the the t how the taxable parcels like how that math maths. I'm not I'm not quite sure, but we can get that answer. Thank you. Because there's some parcels that are a lot bigger than others. So, just to try to make it equitable across the board. Um, that's all my questions for now. Thank you so much. Thank you.

Thank you. Um, I would like to move the item. Uh, I'm making a motion to to provide direction to the city manager on preferred revenue and financial pathways, including whether or not to proceed with preparation for a potential November 2026 funding measure. Do I have a second? I second. Sorry about that. Someone's time ran out. Point of order. Are we Mr. Mayor? Go ahead. Sorry. I'll wait to be called. I don't think they just had a point of order on your motion because it says to give direction, but your motion doesn't quite give that direction. That was my comment.

Okay. To explore options. Um to explore new options. Okay. To to explore Uh mayor if you could just um please uh make specific uh directing staff to commence with polling. Okay. So only uh provide direction to city manager to uh the appetite begin polling for for uh finding preferred revenue and financial pathways.

Yes, for yes to support ALS. Thank you. I still second that. I'm sorry. Why just for uh why just for ALS? Why don't we include the rest uh of hund00 million in the poll? Your point is well taken. ALS and the uh capital needs. Thank you. Thank you. I second it. It's already council member. Yes. I'm never here. We know Bonnet is paying attention to all things fire. We have a motion by Mayor Martinez, second by Council Member Brown. Council member Brown, yes. Council member Bana,

yes. Council member Jimenez, yes. Council member Wilson, yes. Vice Mayor Robinson, yes. Council member Zapeda, yes. And Mayor Martinez, yes. The vote is unanimous. Thank you.

42. Our next item, item P2, is to adopt a resolution approving a donation agreement between the city of Richmond and Orton Entertainment LLC for the donation of said leasehold interest and related personal property located at 1414 through 1422 Harbor Way South and authorizing the mayor or designate to execute the agreement and all necessary documents including escrow instructions and to take all actions necessary to complete the transaction. We have one speaker in person. If there's anyone joining us online that would like to address the council on this item, please raise your hand at this time.

Is uh KCRT, can you pull up the presentation please? And is Dave Alishire and Ann Lampfire, are you both on?

I see Dave Alshshire and Ann Lamp Lampar. Okay. As panelists. Dave, can you can you hear me? Okay. Okay. And I'm on too. I Sorry, I was muted.

That's okay. Um so we have before you uh tonight um approval of a donation agreement um that special counsel uh Dave Alshshire is going to walk through. He's got a presentation prepared um and Ann Lanfar who is special counsel kind of focused on real estate um uh transactional work is also available. Um, and with that, I think I'll I'll hand it over to uh Dave Alshar.

Are you there?

Okay. So, it's great to see you all again and um we had started on this uh negotiation with Orton while I was the city attorney and after I left we uh continued to the conclusion and an did a lot of the uh direct negotiations with the attorney on the agreement. So I think uh part of our presentation uh she can she will deal with some of the specific uh issues that came up uh with legal counsel. Uh so going to the first page um the uh this s this shows the um Craneway Pavilion. It's the second page I guess. Um is a uh map of the facility. Most people are probably familiar with it. Uh the Craneway building, which is where the little yellow circle is, is about 45,000 square ft. And it was a part of the Ford assembly plant. Um and so this uh orients you as to the parcels. Um going to the next page on the background three. Uh so with regards to that background on page three, uh the building was actually constructed in the 30s to be a part of the Ford assembly plant. Uh when the war came along in 41, it was converted as part of the war mobilization effort. Uh industrial facilities all over the country were converted uh to specific uses. Uh in this case it uh was in in the area it was both doing the Liberty

ships and also turning out Jeeps. There were some 49,000 Jeeps um built in the Ford building. uh Ford continued to operate the plant after the war um and uh closed it in 56 and then uh in 1989 the LMA PA uh 7.2 earthquake significantly damaged the building which at that point had no active use going on. Um over time it became derelch. It was red tagged and just sat vacant. nobody undertook uh the renovation. So, the city as part of a redevelopment project um and getting and with uh federal grant funds uh $20 million were put into revitalizing the building uh Orton Development um be uh undertook that project uh through a uh uh development agreement and uh eventually a ground lease uh uh was put together and um in uh two in 2004 there was a settlement agreement worked out between uh the city the redevelopment agency and the state lands commission. Uh the la the land was uh state trust uh land. So there's a public easement put in place and the purpose of that public easement was to assure that uh certain public beneficial uses were undertaken and um the le the lease had very favorable terms. Um the rent was a dollar a year for 55 years but it was

actually had an evergreen clause so that it rolled over after the 55 years. Uh the rationale for this uh for the u public investment uh that was made was the restoration of the property and um the fact that it would be used for uses that were consistent with a state public trust. Next page. So um the the this page tells you what the uh use restrictions were under the public trust. Uh that included uh water related activities, hotel overnight uses. Um uh the restaurants also the visitors serving retail uh ferry service and uh events uh holding event uh activities. Uh the ground lease also had some other important uh issues concerning uh the maintenance was for good order and repair. Um and you it was also besides the public trust it was also um uh municipal regulations and uh going along those lines the city actually uh defined through a cup um the uses that are specified there light industrial retail uh the public trust uses uh but also entertainment restaurant alcohol sales and um so the the list expanded a bit over time and actually uh it was successfully operated for special events uh in uh 2023. Uh Orton came and applied to get a use

permit uh to do the pickle ball use. uh and when we working with the state uh the state didn't really see the linkage between that proposed use uh so we we were in a adversarial position. Uh we tried to work out a compliance agreement. Uh time passed and ultimately the pickle ball use uh did not uh generate the anticipated revenue and the use was terminated. on the next page. Uh this this shows you uh something that's important to understand. The the craneway use and the lease itself uh encompassed the uh square or rectangle that is outlined in red. But there are several uh other parts that were actually a part of the Madison lease. The Madison filled the property with uh industrial uses. Uh the rest of the Ford plant um and they successfully leased it up. But uh the craneway portion in the red was dependent upon the restrooms, storage, uh catering, kitchen, um restaurant sorts of uses that were not actually within um the craneway lease. They were part of an auxiliary lease that actually Madison had and Matt and um Orton did lease those facilities through the auxiliary lease. Um and as we go on it, uh becomes uh you important that for taking over the

craneway facility uh keeping the portion that's within the auxiliary lease is important. And when an uh worked on negotiating the lease, it became a very critical issue to make sure that in the uh offer of gift that uh it would include the the those Madison portions. Uh next page. So Orton's offer uh picking up on the pickle ball ultimately um as you can see from a letter we received uh tonight uh Orton uh determined that they were so far behind in rent that they would not be able to make the rent back up. He couldn't get paid and he therefore um took took it to um close the facility. uh and uh terminate the use and of course that led to some litigation and it's uh still a dispute. Uh Orton had some ongoing expenses. Um so the issue was does he put another use in there? Um or uh what what are his alternatives? And as explained to me, he's getting um uh more senior and concluded even though he had 30 years left in the lease, he did not want to continue with it and he wanted to go the route of offering it uh to somebody else uh as a donation and he initially chose the city because he believed that the city in the long term could make the best use of the facility. He felt that uh he knew that we were unhappy that he'd stopped uh holding

events. He thought that uh an event use was probably a good long-term use. Um he's he's with uh all the work put into the place, he said he was attached to it and he wanted it to go to the best use possible. Um, I make a note there in the bullet point. Um, when he when we originally talked about this, there were some specific things that he included. One of which was he didn't want he was not going to we were to take it as is. He wasn't going to put any more money into it. And um he also wanted to uh conclude the deal by the end of the year. So, as everyone can see, we're not at the end of the year. So, he anticipated a six-month period of time to put this together. Uh, we didn't get that done in the six-month period. Uh, the council did appoint an ad hoc uh committee with the mayor and council members Wilson and Zapeda to work on providing um advice. I I will also note that this has only publicly been in front of the council one one time when we hired a uh consultant to um uh look at the condition of the property and make recommendations on that. Um so the uh but but we did work with the ad hoc. The goal was to conclude in the fourth quarter. Uh the city attorney was to develop a donation agreement. Um and um we in terms of environmental investigation uh there were um phase one and phase two reports that uh would just be updated. Uh next page.

So um the uh due diligence that was done we've talked about a bit one part was updating the u the uh uh geohysical um environmental reports. Uh another uh issue was the uh to have uh a uh consultant uh do basically a uh uh a site assessment u and um our RDH basically prepared that report uh $169,000 council authorized it and the idea was to look at the maintenance that would be required required in uh the next 10 years and get an estimate of that. And they took until um February to come back with that report. And the conclusion was they they laid it out over the 10-year period. Uh but the total over the 10 years was $12 million. Uh a third of that 4 million was actually had to do with the warf. So, um, when we had that estimate, uh, I did go back to, uh, Orton and say this was a a large amount of maintenance that would be required and, um, that this would be something that would be a problem unless I knew I knew that he said asis, but uh, we were going to need a a contribution from him. So, obviously, I didn't start off with $80,000. We uh we went through some numbers. I talked about 50% of that cost. I talked about a third of the cost. Um he he basically his response was

that when you're if if you were buying a piece of property, you wouldn't uh expect the seller to figure out the maintenance for 10 years into the future and then expect the buyer to um uh collect that from the seller. uh the it's in a certain condition, it's usable now. He he isn't going to sell it to us and then have to be responsible for what we pay in maintenance for 10 years going forward. He also said u that the building presumably we were uh buying it and there would be some economic use we would make of it and that economic use should carry uh the maintenance expense. Uh so those those were his points. Uh as he was uh concluding the conversation uh I said well the first year cost could be 180,000. Would you pay that? And he said no. You're not listening to me. And then as he was uh concluding I said what about half of that maintenance cost? That's how we got to the to the 80. Uh just so everyone understands uh we definitely pushed. We didn't just uh say what do you feel like paying? We we tried to get more than what's there. I also want to say that in my staff report I point out one other uh due diligence uh issue that ended up not in my uh PowerPoint here. and that was that um there was a report that the city uh it has to do with the operations. Um as Orton noted uh you're going to

operate this to make some money. Um so the question is what what about the operations? So um that wasn't exactly on the same track as the discussion of getting the donation but there was some discussion of that. Um there the uh council did solicit one uh proposal uh from somebody to operate the facility. Um there uh this came in pretty late that we didn't have a lot of time to discuss that but um the discussion from the discussion it seemed like the council was most interested in an events center sort of operation there. Uh but there was some discussion about whether we should put a lot of money in uh right off the bat, whether we should uh start with a a a smaller uh set of events. Uh see how those did and then uh go through a bid process and start a proposal. start when when we had done that we could put into that proposal what we were expecting uh operators to do and in the end uh I think the council realizes that's a very important discussion that there are a number of options uh how to deal with it there's a number of ways in which to scale the operational events and uh the council decided to um well and because Orton was pushing to make a decision, we decided that we could not

hold up the decision on the um on the donation agreement while we fleshed out what our ideas were on the operator process. the ca the staff did solicit uh a uh consultant to uh throw out um some budgets um that the consultant uh SCS uh opined that if we just left it uh mothalled it and didn't do anything with it really that that annual cost would be 600,000 bucks. Uh that consultant also projected that if we did an event sort of operation the um cost over the revenue would be $900,000 a year. So um those numbers are in the staff report but they didn't get into this presentation and I wanted to include them. Um then uh on the last point here on the indemnity obligations um uh Orton is a defendant in the lawsuit by the uh pickle ball entity. uh we basically as a part of the agreement uh said that he needed to indemnify us and he needed to handle whatever that litigation was and he needed to indemnify the city for any losses respect to that litigation. Also there was an issue over a dock which was out there and was permitted by BCDC. Um it had fallen into disrepair. uh Orton was not inclined to try and repair it. He removed it, but he didn't have uh

the BCDC permit uh to remove it. Uh so we went back contacted um BCDC uh concerning that and um they've agreed to uh the removal and as an extra precaution we made Orton agree that if BCDC comes back against the city on that he indemnifies us for that as well. Next page please. Uh so this is the fee ownership of the property. I think this is a good spot for Ann to come in and talk about the next two or three slides up through the um the actual terms of the agreement.

Okay. Good evening. Uh a little history back. The redevelopment agency originally owned fee title to this property and they entered into the ground lease that we talked about that had a dollar a year uh and evergreen. So that ground lease was done in with those conditions and those uh provisions because of the massive investment that was being made to improve the property at the time that the redevelopment agency was being uh subject to dissolution through and had to file the long range property management plan with the California Department of Finance. It was ultimately determined looking at that fee ownership subject to that ground lease and those terms that it that interest was virtually worthless. And so it was agreed in the uh long range property management plan that the successor agency was directed to transfer fee title to the city which was done. Now, at this point, the city owns fee title subject to that ground lease. And one of the issues from a real estate, it's a little complicated and definitely unusual. If in fact this ground lease is assigned to the city, the city will own the tenant interest and own the fee. Well, under the law, normally that results in a merger. So, everything is, you know, in the greater interest. city owns the fee. Technically, that would terminate the ground lease, but we are providing and Orton has gone along with it, that the assignment of the ground lease is going to specifically say that there is no merger and merger is a legal concept.

It's a matter of intent. So, in the assignment, it says no merger. Now, why would we do that? Well, it's important because of the existence of the auxiliary lease. The auxiliary lease, which we're going to talk about, basically it's that that additional property that's leased um and Orton has it. It's leased from Madison. Again, it's evergreen. Again, it's a dollar a year basically, but it basically is tied to the ground leases. And it's the auxiliary lease says well as long as the those ground leases are in effect the auxiliary lease is going to remain in effect. And obviously this is extremely important because the operation of the craneway property. We need the restrooms, we need the kitchen, we need the common areas and the parking. So the this kind of twisted way of doing things is extremely important to make sure that that auxiliary lease is also assigned to the city and remains in effect. If the ground lease terminates, then the auxiliary lease terminates. And so we are we've been working hard to make sure that that does not happen. So if you uh go on to the next slide, um as we mentioned, there's technically two green leases on the craneway. The above level one and then the subsurface one. Um both of those ground leases were uh held by Orton. Uh he assigned them uh they were assigned by uh to uh Orton Entertainment, which currently holds them. And as I mentioned, the ground lease terms basically is a dollar a year. Uses are as Dave went through and it's it's 55 years with an evergreen. So that's the terms of the ground lease

that we would be accepting assignment on. The next uh slide deals with the auxiliary lease. And again, this is going back and kind of repeating things, but it is the adjacent property, but it's extremely important if we're going to take the assignment of the ground leases, we must also take the assignment of the auxiliary lease. And under the auxiliary lease, uh, MCMP Ford Point realy, which we have nicknamed Madison, which owns the neighboring property, is the landlord. As I mentioned, the auxiliary property is about 3,400 square feet of actual exclusive use of the restrooms, the kitchen, storage areas, but it also includes the use of the common areas and the parking. Um, the auxiliary lease is again a dollar a year, but it does have, which is a little different, it does have common area charges on an annual basis. And so the common area charges for the auxiliary lease um is about estimated for 2026 at $100,000. And that's like I said for the common area usage and the other um uses that are part of the auxiliary lease. So um as to the assignment the assignment of the ground lease is not subject to anybody's approval because Orton is the tenant has those rights under the ground lease. The same thing is basically true under the auxiliary lease. Orton can assign the auxiliary lease concurrently with the ground leases without Madison's consent. However, Orton and Madison have worked out and Madison is going to specifically consent to the assignment and release Orton of liability under the auxiliary lease. And so that's been worked out.

Madison's agreeable to that. Um they are uh Madison is getting from Orton. Orton is transferring or terminating the the next door restaurant lease and transferring the um I understand the uh the liquor license over to Madison, which is kind of the background of why that's being done. But again, the leases are going to be um both the ground leases and the auxiliary lease are are going down concurrently. Is someone trying to Okay. Uh, and the next page on the donation agreement. The donation agreement reads much like a purchase and sale agreement except obviously it's a donation agreement. It calls for the assignment of both the ground leases and the auxiliary lease. It is in ASIS condition. uh which is why it was so important that the due diligence was done by the city staff and we have those that information. Uh Orton is giving us certain limited representations and warranties. Um we will also receive beside the assignment of the ground leases and the auxiliary lease uh a bill of sale for all the personal property. Anything that's out there that's used in the operation of that building, it's coming over to us. There's the cash contribution at closing of $80,000. So, he'll go directly to the city. The representations and warranties are kind of basic. Um, no leases. He's giving us assurance that there's no leases or subleasases out there which are going to cause a problem for us. The utilities are in good working order, uh, etc. Um, as Dave mentioned earlier, there's two areas in which we did push hard to get indemnities from Orton,

which was with respect to the dock removal and that pickle ball uh operator's lawsuit. So, those are not limited. Those are flatout indemnities for those two items. Um the city will be getting a title leaseold title insurance policy for the assignment of the ground lease uh for and we've requested the we've approximated the value of the property at $5 million. Uh the we have requested and I assume I'm pretty sure we're going to get a special endorsement of the title policy that does ensure that when this assignment is recorded in the public records there is no quote merger. So we're trying to ensure that we have coverage for that concept. Um the conditions to closing we he does want to close by May 1st. Um obviously our conditions to closing is the title insurance policy is issued and that Madison does execute that consent to the auxiliary lease assignment releasing Orton of liability and the city will be paying the escrow and title insurance costs uh in this matter. Uh, sorry I don't have an estimate of what that is, but since we're the beneficiary of the title policy and the uh we wanted to use the escrow, excuse me, um um that's why we're picking up those costs. And at this point, the next page, um the donation agreement estimated schedule is that if it's approved tonight and signed, um we will close escrow on or before May 1st. Technically, the city still has, you know, the next 10 days to approve title and due diligence, although, you know, that work has all been done. So, um, David, David, hello,

you're muted. Dave, are you muted? Okay. Well, if Dave is not going to talk, I will. Um, basically, there's been some discussion about, well, what are the alternatives? As Dave mentioned earlier, and Dave, if you get on this, then go ahead and just interrupt me. Um, Orton has told us that David. Yes, there you are. Why don't you go ahead and handle the alternatives page?

Uh, okay. I thought you were going to handle this, but let me go to that page. So, that's on the screen. It Well, let me say something about the schedule here. Um, we we were we were actually scheduled to go on the last agenda, which was two weeks ago. Um, uh, for various reasons, we didn't make that agenda. Uh this is when uh Orton and so what this schedule does is set it back two weeks from what it would have been on the 7th. It would have been the 7th and the 17th. So um we had a uh a very uh sensitive discussion with Orton. uh he felt like uh we it was supposed to be um on the meeting of the 7th uh I uh reviewed with him that we'd had a discussion of why it was going to get pushed over and that this was only uh two weeks longer and that the May 7th or the May one was two weeks after the 17th. And um so I'm only going into that because um somebody said out there that uh it's a uh you know take it or leave it demand kind of thing. Uh I do want to say that we you know originally he wanted it by the end of the year. He actually was working with us as uh we were completing these due diligent efforts and um but he he became very um I think at the end this is now just gone uh quite a long ways and uh so as a result of that he had a conversation with somebody else uh

a backup user and uh this user would not be an event center he wouldn't tell us exactly who it was but it would be some sort of a he called it a marine use. So, um I just wanted to say why this why the schedule, you know, looks um very abrupt. Again, a lot of work has been done on this, but um we're at the point where from his standpoint, the uh honor before May one is um pretty much a um uh something he's not going to back off of. So go to the next page. So um basically the uh options that you have tonight because of that time sensitivity um is Orton uh ha can assign it to a third party. He's basically saying he has selected the third party. the third party has had a board meeting and agreed to uh accept the donation. The last bullet point there uh that it's a marine a marine use. Um, an has put out some points there that that we actually said earlier that um um the landlord has no right to consent to the transfer of the ground lease and um the and cites the sections. Um and in terms of him getting a donation for um for a tax donation credit uh he he gets that whether he gave it to us or to this other party. the um it's also been uh brought up

whether given all of the uh the projected future expenses. Um the standard in the agreement the maintenance standard is good good condition order and repair in uh safe and clean condition. So the if we were to go down the road of um deciding we wanted we we haven't at this point made a demand uh uh that there he he has a copy of the report but we haven't made a demand on him that uh we think it's not in good condition repair. If we were going to go to the extent of getting into litigation on that, we would want to find experts that would testify that it's not in good order and repair. There's a bit of a difference between saying over the next 10 years you should pay this amount of money and in saying that the property currently is not in good order and repair. And uh we actually uh have not contacted a litigation expert who um we could tell you tonight would be willing to stand up and say that if you want to uh explore that litigation possibility uh we'd have to do more homework on that. Um the other point that's brought up that given uh we have somebody that's willing to give the property away uh if we got a judgment that he should um you know let's say next we got a judgment that next year he should put uh 160 or 900,000 into the maintenance Um, I don't

think anybody thinks it's very likely he would stay around and do that. He's willing to donate to people. He would uh walk away from it. He could go through a bankruptcy process uh in bankruptcy. The um uh the bankruptcy court is trying to get the creditors uh paid off with whatever assets are left. Um, and at the end of the day, what we'd end up with is the ground lease would disappear, but what we're left with would no longer have the auxiliary lease as a part of it. The auxiliary lease would go back to Madison. And so the offer of um on the parking and the restrooms and all of that disappears, which probably takes a lot of value out of the remainder of the craneway. Whoever wanted to get in there would have to figure out how to go recover those facilities. Um which is I think that's what Yeah. Uh, so Ann, does that cover your last point there or do you want to say something else about the bankruptcy?

I'm thinking when Ann handed this over to me, she had to go to the bathroom.

Yeah. See? Okay, I'm going. Unless I'm gonna unmute. Sorry, I muted it and um I didn't want to interrupt. Did you say something else? Did you want to say something more profound than I did about the bathrooms, the bankruptcy? Yeah, basically bankruptcy court is detor's heaven and Orton has a real advantage over the city with respect to that auxiliary lease because it does not automatically go with the ground leases. He has to assign it to us voluntarily. And so he has a he has a pretty good wedge right there.

And and you also made the point that I didn't look at that uh there are no personal guarantees that were created as a part of the structure the ground leases originally. Yes.

So next page. Okay. I appreciate your patience. You finally got to the conclusion. Uh the conclusion is fairly simple that um we've done due diligence. We've shown and I've told you that there are significant cost to uh operating the pavilion as a special event uh center. If the most important thing to the city to is to avoid such cost then it should not accept the donation. Uh point two is that um if the uh city my perception uh of the council talking to various council people is that uh there's a desire to have a special event center that in the past that the community got great enjoyment from it. Uh the general area of the where the craneway is uh has a ferry that brings people from all over the Bay Area uh to Richmond. Um there the Rosie the Riveter Museum is a significant national museum. uh the Craneway uh could be the uh location of uh creating uh a city center to celebrate these types of activities. If that is your vision and you want to do that uh then you should accept the donation. Obviously if eventually it doesn't work out uh maybe it can be transferred to somebody else. And then my last point, I pretty much covered it. I honestly I guess the best way to say

it is I've kind of burned my burned my wad in terms of um uh stringing Orton along from uh December to where we are now in uh that would takes us to the end of uh the end of April. Um I maybe he's bluffing but I feel like um he he did move forward with firming up this alternative and um so I I don't think he's going to give us more negotiating time after tonight. So if if you whichever way you decide the two above, whether you decide to accept the donation or not accept the donation, uh I don't think you should think that we're going to get more time if we if you take it past tonight. I think he's just going to go um take take the offer away and go with his second choice. So, we're happy to um uh answer questions.

First, I'd like to know if there's any public speakers. We have one in person speaker and one online speaker.

Go ahead. Cordell Hendler. So, good evening, Mayor Martinez, council. For the record, I am Cordell Hendler and I have enjoyed this presentation. So, thank you Dave and Ann for that presentation. So, I will go I read the agreement. So, go ahead with it. So, someone makes a motion approves it. So, so that way the city can get Orton off their backs. So, just go ahead approve the agreement. That's it. Yeah, we have one more in person speaker deamura.

Hello. Um, so I was listening to this presentation and it was a bit difficult to understand, but um I'm assuming that this man is trying to donate you money so you they can preserve the cran wave museum because it needs a lot of maintenance. And I think if it's not going to cost us, the city money like the citizens that pay for taxes, that pay for the parcel taxes, you're not going to tax us $50, $100 for this, then I think it's fine. It's good to preserve historical things. It' be the best thing you guys said yes to all night cuz all you guys ever say yes to is raising our taxes as if we're made of money. And it's starting to look like you're treating us as slaves. You're supposed to be protecting us brown and and and uh brown and black people. You're not protecting us. You're charging us taxes. Millions of dollars. It's not a million dollars here and there that you guys just get from nowhere. You're getting it from the people that own houses, people that pay rent, HOAs, and y'all are treating us like money bags. It's not okay. You're supposed to be protecting us. You're black and brown, most of you. And that's because the it was thought that black and brown people would take better care of us, but you guys aren't doing that. you're just charging us more taxes and treating us like money bags. And that is not okay. Not okay at all. And the more I come to these meetings, the more I see that that's all you're doing. And I'm going to make sure that the city of Richmond that's less educated, the people that are less educated and don't understand what you're saying, understand that you guys are just charging us more taxes. And the city manager always says yes, yes, yes. And convinces all of you to pay more to make us pay more taxes. That is that okay? But if this is going to be free, this is free money to preserve a museum. That's the best thing you could say yes to all night. Thank you very much.

That was our last inerson speaker. We have one speaker online and that speaker is Tarnell Abbott. Tarnell, please unmute yourself and you may begin.

Good evening. I um not exactly clear about this, but this 20 million dollars was paid by the taxpayers for uh renovating the craneway into a a a very beautiful space that Orton was able to use to rent. Uh we charged him a dollar a year and apparently uh he rented it successfully. Um so how much did he make in those years of renting this venue from us? Um and now he's selling the lease to us. It just really doesn't make sense. Um it it's um it was a favorable lease to Orton. And now how much did he actually spend? He gained money renting it or being rented from the from the city for a dollar a year. Did he spend money on maintenance and how much did he spend on maintenance? Who gained by his use of it? It wasn't the city, it wasn't the taxpayers. Yes, we should have the auxili auxiliary um lee. So, uh surely we can do better than a dollar a year from this. And that's uh you know that's that's the fine print going forward. But it's kind of ridiculous that he's gifting it to us or donating it to us. uh we gave it to him and let's not forget that. Thank you.

Thank you. And that was the last speaker.

All right. Uh Councilman Verbana. Well, actually before we get started, I just wanted to and I should have said this at the outset that um the resolution that was attached to the um item P2 um I updated and would the city uh clerk's office um updated the it's posted online for those who are listening on the city council meetings web page. Um if you click on the meeting um date and then you'll see item P2 updated resolution, you'll you'll find the updated resolution and and those who are in the audience there are hard copies uh by the um pink

speaker cards. Speaker cards. It's late. Um so with that um I'll turn it over to Mr. Mayor and I will turn it over to council member Bana.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So, I would like to explain first of all to Irania and Cordell that this is not what they think. It's not something free. It's a building with $12 million of liability. So, we're not being a gift. We are handed over a liability and city is gonna say yes. Why? Because Orton says hurry up. You're late. And Dave says we have to listen to him. What's going to happen if you don't listen to him? He's going to file bankruptcy. And an says we're going to lose that auxiliary lease. We won't have access to the kitchen. Well, who's going to have access to the kitchen without the main floor? Number one. And number two, why can we not enter into a lease agreement with Madison? If they are letting us do get get the lease from Orton, they're okay with it. Why not a direct lease from them? It's very confusing. By the way, while I'm speaking, I would like to ask the city manager to please calculate the amount of money the city has paid to Mr. Alshshire to negotiate this wonderful deal.

Um, so they're going to give us $80,000. We pay the escrow and title and we are paying Mr. Al for that. um I think a fraction of a peanut with $12 million. And if there is such a backup user, a nonprofit with marine use, I would love him to take over the place. Why not? If they can make money, let them do it. And the big elephant in the room here nobody talks about is that Orton has had an obligation by the law to preserve the historic building. They did not. And we're going to let it go. Neglect. Just close our eyes and say bye-bye. No, we should not. The city should not pay for someone else's obligation. That's not moral. That's not ethical. That's not correct. And um I'm very unhappy with the deal. I'm very unhappy with the narration that Dave is selling us a vision. I mean, how much money does the museum next to that is making? So even if you don't do anything, mothball it as Dave says, it's $600,000 a year. And again if there is another use of what what is this city I mean we have no plan we have no use we don't have anyone to run it we don't have the resources um we don't have an event manager to rent nothing. So we're just going to get $12 million of liability.

Uh what for? If if there is another user that can make money. Why shouldn't we do it if they can do it better than us without that $12 million liability? It's it's a total puzzle to me. We are being sold a dream at $12 million. Um anyway, um please I need an answer to the question about Daves. Do you have the answer yet?

This is Emily Combmes. I'm finance director. I have the answer to that question. So, um, our legal expenses as reported out before close session on April 7th for um, Craneway, um, through September 30th, 2025, which is what we have the invoices through, was $105,90080. Could you repeat that, please? We're receiving $80,000 from Orton and the amount of money we're paying an attorney to negotiate the deal is $15,980 and that was through September 2025. What the deal? Thank you very much. You're welcome.

And I would like uh to ask the finance director and city manager based on what logic you think it's acceptable. Were you involved in the negotiation? Um, city manager curl? No. And may I ask why? That's an excellent question. I have worked with Miss Orton in the past. So, why were you not involved? Was it u I mean, how how does the process usually goes and how did it go in this case? I think the people have a right to know, Mr. Mayor. Well, um, it's $12 million of people's tax money,

right? And and we're talking about the contract. Exactly. Exactly. I want to know what went wrong so it won't happen again. So, I would like to know what justification the city manager and the finance director. You're saying you're you're wondering what went wrong. We don't know whether or not anything went wrong. You're making a value judgment over a process. May I finish? Not with that line of questioning. Okay. So, I I think the point that um I agree with the assertion that it is not customary for the city manager to be excluded repeatedly from real property negotiations and that is what has transpired.

So, let me put my question this way so it's acceptable to Mr. Mayor. What are your plans for paying that $12 million for repairs in the within the next I don't know six tw 10 years? Uh what is your plan? When we also go ahead

when we present the um May 5th draft budget, we will have uh public works staff who are here in the audience um provide the council with an update on the CIP projects that are in the pipeline and um they will uh work with the city council over the term of the budget development to assist in prioritizing the public works projects. There's currently um 90 projects that are in the queue. So this will um this this would be um this would be the 90th either the 90th or the 91st. So it would be like next to the cheese park improvements budget that

Well, no, I think this would be different because you actually have a written report that indicates what improvements need to take place. And so since this building is attached to the um since the craneway is a portion of the Ford building that is owned by Madison Capital, um my recommendation to the city council would be to um program out the improvements as specified in the report um and to work on getting more refined estimates because the numbers were moving a bit during the estimate. um and they're very back of envelope um numbers. So we anticipate that that that the price is going to increase for the improvements.

So are you saying that it's going to have priority over other projects that don't have the calculation and estimates because ultimately it would be up to the city council but I I do think that there is a substantial risk associated with um not performing the maintenance that's been identified in a public facing document. And what are your immediate plans? Suppose we approve it tonight and we get over take over the building. What's next? Um public works staff is in the audience and I would defer to them on their their next steps based on their capacity.

I'm not okay but please you can explain but I would also like to know the usage and making money out of it. What are your plans for that? Um, I provided a proposal. Um, and I think the council is going to provide additional direction. We we don't currently have one. Okay.

Good evening, Mayor Martinez, city council members. For the record, Daniela, Poly Wars director. Um, that is a very good question. I mean, this is a a major liability that we will be taking over as the public wars department. Definitely we'll have to shift many things just we will have to ask city council what are the the other priorities that that have to be delay because I mean it's not just putting money number one is it's actually more than $12 million is let's say round it up we like to round it up the $30 million today's money uh well that that has to come some from somewhere right so in and even if you add it to what we have we have the same resources. I mean when you have a operational capacity is not only a staff you have you have equipment you have materials you have a resources I mean in reality when you talk about the when all the staff is together where all the staff is not on vacation when all the staff that in reality you have 80% of the total capacity it's not 100% at any given moment the best number you can have 80% of our capacity because somebody's off or or a group of people are off etc. So if the staff is going to I mean one of the things that we need to or we would have to address immediately is a windows for example and then the roof. So it I mean we're just deciding the trade-off which community center is not going to be addressed for that for example because now the staff that could be in a community center now has to be in this building right I mean I I hope that in the numbers they this building generates I don't know what four or$5 million per year is that what it generated hopefully because that that that would that would make sense that investment of $30

million is is good for for the city they will because that would generate more money but if it's not going going to generate that amount of money. I I I think uh it's a we need to be very careful with that decision. Just that uh I'm sorry. You said I you assume it would generate how much to make? No, no, no, no. As a I mean I I am a a small business owner and if I see it like that, okay, let me recoup the money in in three years, right? Otherwise, I mean to make sense.

I I appreciate that. Thank you very much. And I would like to ask the city attorney, why have we not um uh enforced preservation of this historic building and the repairs until now? Is your question why we haven't gone after Orton for his obligations under his current lease? Um yes, I I don't have a I don't have a great answer for you um on that question. I don't whose job is it? Is it the city attorneys, city managers? Who who's supposed to do that?

I think we'd get direction from um you know, I think that would be in coordination with the the city manager, but but the charter says it's respectfully, Shannon, I know you inherited this, but respectfully, the charter says it's the city attorney enforces ordinances. Well, I think you know violations. I know you're new as a city attorney. No, no. I I can tell you this. We have an inspection report, right? We have I think before this time we didn't have an inspection report but now that we have one I mean that is a pathway.

Can we enforce it now? Can we put it? It's it's a puzzle to me that a building that's worth $5 million with $12 million or $13 million liability already has a buyer. I don't know if that's imaginary or real. Mhm. So I wonder if we put a lean, make it very clear to the new buyer that this is the case, is there going to be a buyer? What what do you think? Can we enforce it?

So we can go down the road of enforcement of of of enforcing our our le their his obligations under the lease. I think we've uh you know talked about that road um of you know taking a couple of years to litigate that and the potential for him to uh to go into bankruptcy and having us having a hard time um you know getting any money out of a judgment from him. So that's that's

well will we will land the same place we are now. Well, you know, I think the difference would be is if you accept the donation agreement tonight, you will have accepted the the building um and you know, potentially activate it for public for public use. But, you know, it's it is a pathway. Um and I think Dave Alshshire in the last slide um you know outlined the alternatives and it is one alternative is to to not accept the donation agreement tonight and to um com go into litigation um and compel Orton to comply with his lease obligations.

And why is there so much emphasis on the auxiliary lease of the kitchen and restroom? Why can't we get into an agreement and lease it directly from Madison? because there's no access to them without the main floor. There's no use to them. Who's going to lease them? I think that's an an question. Basically, uh, Madison doesn't have to do anything with us because Orton controls it right now. If Orton wants to maintain that ground lease and the auxiliary lease, there's nothing we can do to force him to transfer the auxiliary lease to us.

Yeah. But you talk about it as if it's impossible to do that. Have you talked to Madison? It's not a matter of talking to Madison first. Orton controls that lease. So Madison can't just unilaterally terminate the auxiliary release. He would have to Orton would have to agree that that terminates and then we could enter into a lease directly with Madison. But right now the auxiliary release is controlled by Orton. Yes. But we're talking about the case of a possible case of bankruptcy. And what happens to that?

If if Orton was to go into bankruptcy and file for protection under the bankruptcy court, he would his obligations are under the ground lease. That's completely separate from the auxiliary release. He could leave that in effect. If the ground leases terminate, the auxiliary release automatically terminates. So if that happened, if in bankruptcy court Orton walked away by filing a chapter 7 and basically said, "Okay, let's terminate the ground leases. I'm walking." Okay, the ground leases are gone. City owns the fee. U the auxiliary lease is gone. But you would have to go negotiate with Madison. The the the disadvantage of that, it could happen. Madison could be real reasonable. But right now, if you recall, that auxiliary lease is an evergreen, meaning the term keeps on going and it's only for a dollar base, a dollar rent base a year. And it has it does have a common area maintenance charges of about $100,000 a year. But if you look at the common area maintenance charges, the way they're calculated in that auxiliary lease, they're not unreasonable. Okay? So the question is would Madison give such a favorable lease to the city if Orton completely walked away and the auxiliary lease terminated? We would have we would just have to hope Madison would negotiate a nice lease for us. That's that's all I can say.

Does it mean that it's worth $12 million $13 million of liability? Is that what you're trying to convince us? No, I I'm not advocating either way. I'm just telling you what will legally happen with respect to the rights under those documents.

Yes. So I wonder has anyone talk to Madison or Orton to see what h anyway um I'm almost done with my questions. I'm very unhappy with this and um I'm going to vote no 12 or 13 million of people taxes. I had a hard time for three years to get park improvements in my community, which is probably maximum $1 million, and we can build many parks with that money. And taking over that, so so you can make it.

I'm I'm just saying it's not a good deal. We have the responsibility to be as careful with people's tax money as possible, and this is not a good deal. And I really don't understand. You you've made your point. Thank you. Um, Council Member Wilson,

um, can I talk to public works director Chabaria, please? I want to clarify some of the things you said. So, um, you indicated that you were concerned about the $12 million in liability. Can you explain to me where that $12 million comes from? What is that liability?

Well, all the improvements that has to happen in that building, there are different cracks, the the uh windows, water infiltration, and the in the in the piles in the in the bay. So, and according according to the consultants report, over what time frame will we be spending $12 million? Well, I'm basing this on my experience in Richmond. It's a simple question. Do you know the time the report which I'm assuming you read because you came up here and gave a statement about it. It gives us over several years. Yeah.

Yeah. It's it's over 10 years. It's 10 years of maintenance and repairs. And one of the things I want people to understand, and I'm sorry I'm picking on you, but you really you got up here and you said, "Oh, we need to make $4 million a year in this small business." One of the things I'll point out is we're not a small business. We're a city. It's a different sort of sort of relationship to spending money. One of the things I want to just clarify is that it's about a million dollars a year in some deferred maintenance, but mostly repairs moving forward. And one of the things I want my council member colleagues to understand is the city is eventually on the hook for this $12 million because whether we sue him and he goes into bankruptcy and we take the building back in the following 10 years, we're going to pay about $12 million. Um if he gives it to a nonprofit and the nonprofit, they're not going to spend a million dollars a year on it. They're going to kind of like store some ropes in it. You know, I think I heard the idea of marine storage that this isn't a nonprofit that's going to have festivals in the in the space. It's going to be storage. So, we're gonna get a nonprofit in there to store some stuff, marine related stuff, and we're going to sue them, and then they're going to lose that lawsuit, and then they're going to go bankrupt. I'm I'm guessing this is just a a possible path. And when they go bankrupt, we're going to take control of the building. And again, we're going to be on the hook for 10 years worth of $12 million worth of repairs. So, one of the things I'm trying to push here is like I'm not excited about taking on this liability either, but it's coming to us. It's either going to come to us right now, you know, when we got a little bit of money in the budget and we can, you know, sort of start we can have a Fourth of July event there this year or it's going to sit empty or full of ropes for a couple of years. Um, there was a question about law, you know, what do we pay for the lawyer to negotiate this? we're gonna pay more to litigate against either Orton, you know, to to make them pay for their deferred maintenance or or

to, you know, the new the new tenant that they give it to to try to make them use the building the way it's supposed to. And so we have either a path of litigation and and suboptimal use of the building that ends with the city taking it back and it is on your plate, you know, and and it is going to take things away from other projects and we're going to have to as a council really make decisions about that. But I really am going to ask people who say that we shouldn't take the building back to sort of really think ahead to like what is the alternative here. I I think you gave the alternative is because you very it's very evident right from that let's let's say yes that building is going to come to the city today or years from now

right okay if we continue the plan that the city council have established right improvement improving of parks improvement of lighting improvement of traffic safety improvement building the complete street finalizing the 90 plus CIP projects that we have the city will be in a better position years from now to take over that building which if we take it now and as you said of July you already putting pressure already

so in uh in are you allow are you do you feel comfortable allowing the community to go to that building as it is

oh yes I do actually so I'm going to stop. I That's all my questions for you. Thanks. And I'll just return to my prepare comments, but I appreciate it. Um, yes, I am comfortable, you know, with some minimal repairs allowing the community to go back to that building. I do think that I hear what you're saying, like, hey, if we let it sit on the bay and be empty for three or four years, you know, maybe we can make a better plan. But I do think that the community really does want to get back in that building. And certainly like the people who live in Point Richmond right there in Marina Bay. Sure, they're maybe they're the ones who want that building back the most, but people from all over the community and again maybe because it's in district 5. I do get the emails from people saying, you know, why can't we used to have this is concert or this craft fair or this show or something and when are we going to get this building back? Why does it sit empty? So, I do think it is a cost to us both reputationally and in terms of like the city we provide for our for our residents if we just let a building sit empty um for years. that again my my main point it eventually comes back to the city so why not take it back now so we can turn the lights back on host Fourth of July host you know the Rosie the riveters shouldn't have to meet out on the grass they should be able to come in the building I'll stop there

thank you any other um u and council members has his hand up also okay um I will go with uh council member Sepa since since I have no idea when he raised his hand.

Thank you. Um I I was on the on the ad hoc committee and I when this was first brought forward I think it was a a it appeared to be a great opportunity because of the really really bad agreement the evergreen agreement. Uh, I know there was a comment made that uh he has about 30 more years left and he's going to retire or leave or whatever, but it's an evergreen. So, it's not 30 years. It's a lifetime plus plus plus. So, I'm sure that if this agreement stays with him, he is going to put it in his will and give it to his kids and his kids kids because it's such a great deal for a dollar to rent this huge property. So, I know that we had a question before several months ago, maybe a year or so ago for for uh Dave to see about looking at this evergreen contract because Dave, you had mentioned that it was illegal, right? And so we got to figure out how to get out of that illegal stuff. And this moving forward with this, we would we would in a way get rid of this super bad agreement, but at the same time, are we just getting rid of one bad agreement and going into another bad agreement? Um, Mr. Orton pretty much is holding every single card is the way that I been seeing it. So there's there's we're we're going to get uh done with one way or the other. It's just uh one of them is harsher than the other one. Um

so I I I want to also talk about a little bit Dave or I'm not sure who might be able to answer this. So in the agreement currently we have a uh stipulation that says good order in repair, right? And I know that we had discussed before, what does that mean? And could we hold him accountable to this $12 million that he has not been repairing for the past many years? And is there a debate between what good order and repair means? And and how would a potential judge see that? Uh uh, Council Member Sepeda, I'm going to uh pause you for a minute because we need to uh extend our meeting. So, do I have a motion?

I will make that motion that we extend the meeting until we finish this item or or 11 or 11. Well, we can't go past 11, but yes. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Do I have a second? I second. Okay. Motion by Jimenez, seconded by Council Member Sepa. Council member Brown, no. Council member Bana, no. Council member Jimenez, yes. Council member Wilson, yes. Vice Mayor Robinson, yes. Council member Zapeda, yes. And Mayor Martinez, yes.

The motion passes with council members Brown and Bana voting no. Okay, you may continue. Thank you, Mr. Elshshire. Would you mind uh for the people what does good order and repair in this instance could mean?

Uh it's obviously a somewhat vague term. It's not uh there isn't a uh a schedule, a maintenance schedule that uh was a part of the lease that says you have to do this monthly, you have to do this quarterly. Uh so if we were thinking about litigating it u as to whether the report which we received which is basically scheduling repairs out for 12 years I would want to talk to uh experts in uh construction as to uh you know you wouldn't want to actually file lawsuit unless you had a couple firms firms that would uh be willing to testify as to the current condition uh and the maintenance schedule that they were pursuing is not uh in in the industry within the practice in the industry. Uh that's not a sufficient repair because we've not been investigating the route of uh suing them over the construction. We haven't undertaken that investigation. But I think I I think for an attorney just to uh sit here looking I don't even think the um the uh preparer uh of that report prepared it as a recommendation of work to be done. they didn't prepare it as uh experts uh to go litigate uh whether the treatment and the condition has been adequate. So I don't I don't think you have a solid opinion on that at this point. But I I would start by going to um the person that wrote that report and

ask more questions to find out whether they think uh that the repair uh the the state of order of the facility in the condition that it is uh violates industry standards as being in good order and repair. Is this the type of stuff if they went around they'd find lots of buildings that are kind of in this condition. Uh then it might be hard to prove that this building is not in good order and repair. So you need you need you need not lawyers, you need industry people in the industry who can tell you whether in their opinion this is um unusually bad or not.

Thank you. And I know that there was a comment made by someone within the presentation that the maintenance is for future, but I just want to make sure that we know that it's not for future. It's deferred maintenance because the roof is leaking. The windows are not working correctly. There's a lot of work that needs to be done that should have been repaired uh potentially on an annual basis or something to upkeep it. and he only spent a little bit less than $200,000 a year in maintenance. So, we know he wasn't investing more. He was probably just doing the the bare bones uh to keep the building going without having to invest a lot more. Um, and I know there's been a lot of articles before about the Craneway uh where we know that he he had made a lot of money from uh acquiring the Craneway and he went and got federal funding and and other stuff. So, he didn't put a lot of his own money into it. My my my concern is that we're we're potentially if he donates this uh and we accept it, he will be getting a tax break and we're going to be taking in this liability and giving a millionaire a tax break and taking the liability ourselves. And yes, the the building may come back to us and the auxiliary portions might not come to us later, but I believe that whoever owns those will most likely want to uh lease them to us. Why would they why would they want these restrooms that they're not going to be able to use or the kitchen or parking lot? I'm sure that Madison Capital will want to make a dollar or two or more. uh leasing it back to the

city. And Dev, I think somewhere in the presentation you were saying that the the lease for that Orton's paying 100,000. I think I saw that in one of the slides. that that's the um uh the community u maintenance. He contributes to the common area fund and that was 100,000. Common area. He's paying 100,000 towards the common area stuff. Correct. So then if we take it over, is that also an additional cost we would have to do annually? Yes. Okay. Because it's in the ground lease and there they make the calculation and tell you what it is.

Thank you. And then in in the attachments that we have um cuz I know that we we it's really exciting to hear that we potentially might get the crane way and we can make events again and we can do stuff with it. But then there's this $12 million liability that kind of might make some people think about it twice. And it's $12 million in today's dollars. By the time we actually get started and whatever, not it might be closer to 20. But my last question is to the city manager in regards to the the the different scenarios in the attachment six from the consultant. There's it appears that there's nothing that we can do in there that will bring revenue back. Am I reading the report correct?

Not on the scale that is going to significantly cover the operating costs. A subsidy an ongoing an ongoing subsidy is required. And how much is that? Uh, council member Sepa, your time is up. I will give you uh uh a chance to finish up this line of questioning. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah. So, Miss Curl, I mean, I see the report, but I just want to see if we have anything else. There's one on the low end.

Uh, on the low end, I I think it would be prudent um to increase staff and public works to provide revenue for an off-site operator. Um, probably on the low end, I would budget a million without capital. No, really without capital. Okay. And then if we were to hire a special event coordinator then there I know that that came about to about how much?

Well, that would be probably within that million that would the init the most recent proposal we received was for um approximately 550 um,000 but that wasn't uh comprehensive all-in. I mean many of these are these are just estimates. They're just back of the envelope Rome estimates um based on the information um limited information that was uh available at uh that was that was provided to staff. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Okay. U Vice Mayor,

thank you. I just have a couple of questions um for the city attorney if I could. Um, one of the concerns that I've had for this project all along is this evergreen lease and whether or not it is legal. Um, can you say a little bit about that? My understanding was that there was a cap to 55 year cap and so this automatic renewal in you know into infinity does that is that in adherence to California law.

You know I may uh ask an who is the real estate lawyer here uh to to kind of weigh in on this. Um but did you hear the question an

yes I did. Um it was done uh if you recall this was all done under the redevelopment law which back in those days was very broadly interpreted. I agree that I when I first saw this lease with an evergreen I was surprised by it because it seemed to be kind of an end run toward the limitation on leasing. uh California law restricts cities uh from leases uh beyond 50 years. Um this was redevelopment and I don't think that that actually applied but under California law leases are maxed out at 99 years just commercially. So do I think it's kinky? Yes. It's been going on for a long time. Um, I would hesitate to challenge that evergreen in the ground leases because the same evergreen is over in the auxiliary lease. So, if we are going to trash it, we're going to trash both. We're going to get rid of the auxiliary lease concurrently. So, I think it's definitely uh an unusual situation under the leasing laws generally, much less what happened. But like I said, redevelopment was very broadly interpreted in California back in the day.

So, can I just ask a little bit more of a direct question to whomever? If we took whatever entity it is that held these leases to court and challenged that evergreen lease, I won't hold you to it, but do you think we would have a good chance to win? Well, I guess you mean not taking the assignment. So, we're going to go back and challenge Orton. I'm not talking I just like if you know just this is just a question an abstract question. Do we is there legal grounds to challenge the evergreen lease irregardless to the provision?

Yeah, I just want to understand that. Yes, I think there is the the one defense that might come back is reliance by Orton, you know, when he operated based on that and that he expended a lot of money uh on the improvements. No matter where he got it, he he did get it. So, there's yes, I think it's a kinky uh uh provision. I think it's attackable, but I think there's defenses in the law under the concept of equity. Well, it's not fair to suddenly do this now um after he's relied upon it for so long. Uh I'm not a litigator, but Shannon, and if hold on one second, that's is a good point.

Sure. So, if if if we don't go for this thing tonight and he gives it to the marine folks and they hold the lease, could we challenge them on the evergreen lease? You could. Yes. I mean clearly there wouldn't be the equity issue, right? Because they got it as a donation.

Well, not necessarily. The point I I I can't answer that question as directly as I'd like. Basically, I don't know, you know, what case law in California would say about look at he already had this, he transferred it, they accepted it in good faith. I don't know if they would be entitled to make the same defensive claims that Orton would. I really don't know. Okay, one more question about Lisa's. Um, one of the issues that we've been bumping our heads against is that this very loose language um around the maintenance responsibilities. Um, is there any way to challenge that? Because my understanding is that because that we didn't explicitly say in that lease, we being the city, we being redevelopment agency, whomever it was that put together this poor lease, um they didn't explicitly say what they meant by in good condition. It makes it very difficult to say that you're responsible for the windows and the roof and the this and that. Um, is there any way today that we could enforce that maintenance agreement on whomever it is that holds the lease?

Whoever gets that lease, yes. The problem is, like Dave said, the language is loosey goosey and it's a matter of interpretation. So, is it immediately? Is it now, right now, in good condition and repair? Yeah, you probably could say that. Is it in good condition and repair under commercial standards for the long term? Uh, I don't know. It's really a matter of interpretation. And, uh, the one thing in California, courts are very reluctant to um, you know, find against tenants and that kind of thing if they've been doing any kind of actions in good faith. So, it's it would be an expensive hard litigation for enforcing that concept. I don't I I I it's so vague. The language is so vague. I can only give you kind of a vague answer. And I think Shannon has more background in litigation than I do. And I I litigation's never pretty Yeah. It's expensive unknown path to try Yes.

try to get whomever gets this lease to take care of it. And if I could make one other excuse me uh if I could make one other comment. If you look at this lease if I if you recall I mentioned that the long range property management plan said hey this property subject to this lease is virtually this interest is virtually worthless. So successor agency give it to the city because with this ground lease sitting on top of it the way it is it's virtually ownership of the property. So I think that any tenant would come in and say, "Hey, look, if you really look at this, we really own this property, so bug off, you know, kind of thing." So it's it's a very unusual very unusual situation with this ground leases the way they are, especially with that evergreen and a dollar a year. It's it's definitely on the unusual end. Let's put it that way.

Yeah. Two more two more points, one question, then one comment. The last was I was unclear or unsure if the building was seismically sound. Was it is it seismically sound? I don't even know. I can't remember if that was if that was assessed. If you're asking me, if I recall flipping through the report, I I think it did deal with that, but I don't remember. And I thought it was in good shape, but I'm not the one to answer. So,

hi, good evening, mayor, council members. Lena Velasco, director of community development. Um, as part of the condition assessment, they did look at the structural support. Um, they are recommending some near-term plus midterm reinforcement. Um, and we also did a tier six analysis, but in general, it's in good shape. It's really the building envelope that needs securing. Um, but we do need to think long term. Some of the concrete around the the piles that support the pier that the building sits on um are exposed and as water gets into um the steel, it compromises. So, you want to tackle those things now before water gets in further.

Thank you. So, I I had a really disturbing conversation with Eddie Orton. I'll leave it there, but one of the things he said was that at the height of his operations, the building um as an entertainment venue made a net profit of 100 to $200,000 a year. Um that to me is disturbing and took me back considering all the different estimates for the cost of running for the cost of functioning for cost of maintenance. Um I am of the mind and I have been of the mind for the whole time. It has not been a secret that although I can see a really profound vision for the marina, you know, that we could build it out, that there's the ferry there, there's there's things there's assets that we need to take advantage of. It could be a center of economic activity. It should be a center of economic activity. Um, I more and more believe that this is not the right time to do that when we've making so much progress on turning things around in the core of the city and getting things done. Finally, I just I keep trying to figure out how this thing could work in this moment and I just can't I can't see it. There's so many things that would need to be in place that are not quite in place. We're in a terrible time in the national economy. We don't know which way that's going to go. Um, we've got a bunch of projects in motion that are going well. And I I feel like I feel like we're buying a money pit. And I say that, you know, knowing eventually it'll come back, knowing

whatever, but maybe we will be in a better place and could take it on at another time. Um, I just keep thinking about all of the the all of the deferred maintenance. I I I strongly believe I'm going to finish this statement because everybody else was able to finish theirs. I strongly believe that if we when we get the assessment back for the facilities for all of the different facilities across this the city that we're probably going to see very similar maintenance needs for all of our recreation centers, our buildings, all of those things. And I I feel like we don't even have the resources to deal with the things we already have. And I I just can't in good conscience take on another one, you know, wholeheartedly. I just can't. So,

uh, we have more speakers. Okay. Uh, Council Member Jimenez, thank you so much. Um, so I I want to ask something about the building. Um, and the because I heard that the building, the thing that is is the value right now is the lease. No, actually the building because is the lease. So can you explain a little bit more about that and maybe an or somebody? Yeah, an

uh are you talking about what the valuation of the leasehold assignment is if we take it? Well, I I

I was hearing that like the building basically right now because we had this lease the is the the cost is nothing is the lease that it cost is is valuable right now. Is that true? Because um Orton has a lease that is one like that is if if if we how can I explain this? Um the value the real value of all of these is on the list not on the building right now. Uh, let me take a shot at answering your question and you can tell me if I'm off base. Let's pretend the ground leases are gone and the city just I mean we forget the auxiliary released. Here's here's the ground leases. They you know we get the uh assignment and the city owns the fee and the ground lease is gone. What is that building and that property worth? The guesstimate that I was able to get kind of a little bit out of Orton and stuff is5 to6 million dollars. So if the ground leases were gone and you just own the flatout fee, how much is it worth? The guess is about5 to$6 million right now. Is that answering your question?

Yes. Yes. Okay. Thank you. So it's difficult because for me it's also I hear what um council member Robinson is saying around the priorities and I think we are the ones making the final decision about what are priorities and how we had been deferring maintenance of everything. Um so what will be our priorities but at this moment I I also think that there is two path. One is to not take the the building back um and eventually getting expense litigation um because we are not getting it back. So there is an evergreen uh thing that we had to challenge and what I am hearing is that it will be an expensive litigation. Then the the matter of interpretation about uh what good maintenance or bad maintenance is is another thing that we have um uh that will cost a lot of money as well. So I I just and I don't know like maybe the city attorney helped me with that but I see in the two ways that we have we are going to spend money and a lot of money and in one way we will get uh this building back and we can bring it back to the community to make events and maybe find some

uh organization that can manage and we can provide uh another space for our community together and to be thinking about the vision of an economic development that is not just it's not going to be brought particularly by that building but that it could be an economic development development in that area. The other path that I see is uh we don't get it back. We have an evergreen lease that we don't know uh when we are going to be able to challenge and end that and in the process uh Orton can do mostly it seems whatever he he can't uh while we are um doing the litigation to prove that a the the maintenance needs to be good and is and and what I see is that we the city in 2004 signed a bad deal that we will had to fight in court to get it right. So we will be doing these litigations and we will doing this expensive litigation to interpret what a good maintenance is as well because it's part of the agreement that he has right now. So if we let him to continue and do whatever we will have to litigate because the bad agreement that we have. So we are going to be spending money

either way. So the question here is are we going to let this building to seed and no provide any benefit from the community even for gatherings and spend money into that litigation? or are we going to have this building to serve the community and yes spend some money but at least getting into that vision and getting it used by the community. And this is what I see here that the two and and and I will finish with this because is that what we learned is that all the weights lead to the city either now or in I don't know what happened is responsible for that building is responsible for that building. So we take it now with conditions that we can use it or we wait and the building will deteriorate more and then we will it will not cost only 12 million but more and the city and the residents won't be able to use it. Thank you. Um uh I have actually the same question uh uh but I'm going to frame it this way. How do we require and enforce the level of maintenance that we're setting for ourselves?

Is that a question for me or the city attorney or uh it's it's a question for for anyone who can answer it. So, so we set a level of uh of a maintenance for ourselves and we're expecting the same thing from others. So, how do we uh require and enforce that level of maintenance? Can you ourselves?

You inspect the you inspect the building uh and if you think it's in violation, you send a notice of violation and you give them a time period. You specify what they have to fix and you give them a time period to do it. Right. But but you said that uh that that would uh end up in litigation since the uh language is so loosey goosey.

Well, no. I I said if you were in litigation, but you can send your notice and see what they do. But that's that's how you start it. Um, you start it by giving a notice that you find the building um out of compliance with a standard and you have to specify what what you think is out of out of uh improper at this point in time. And then they either go correct it or they um respond and uh you know maybe you get into a compliance agreement. Uh if their response is not uh satisfactory then if you're going to think about litigation you then need to find some experts that are going to be on your side. But it you start off with um with staff doing an inspection.

Okay. So, you've answered the the part about how we start and I'd like to know how we finish. And it sounds like uh if they're they're not uh working with us, we would finish uh through litigation. Is that correct? Yeah. Ultimately, if um if you don't get the compliance you want, you then uh uh end up telling telling them that uh you're you're going to force them to comply because they're in breach of contract.

Okay. I guess um um and and as to whether you ultimately win that lawsuit, it depends uh who comes up with the best experts that give the most convincing testimony,

right? Um, I see us uh uh holding um a $12 million uh bomb that uh that's going to explode either to uh tonight or or in the future, but we're still holding it. Um so um Um,

we've been we've been talking about a lease. We're not talking about the building, but the um condition of the building is in the lease. So, so the property belongs to the city, correct? The ownership is vested in the city. Yes. And the lease uh belongs to Orton. Correct.

So um so u actually I'm I'm curious uh how many parking spaces are uh in in uh entailed in the auxiliary lease. I don't know the answer to that question. Um, uh, Lena might be the best person because it is a common area overlapping use with that neighboring property that Madison owns.

And I guess the question, Lena, is in the past when you've done events out there, how have they worked out uh how how much of the parking lot does uh Orton get? How do they work that out? staff deferred to um special counsel to answer that question pertaining to the spaces. Okay. So,

I'm I'm I'm asking about past history because you've had events there over time. So, there must be kind of a worked out process that I would think Lena would know the best how in the past you've worked that issue out. Well, uh I think the question would be uh what events have we had since Madison's been uh owners? Uh because because before that it was Eddie Orton and he could decide how much spaces would be used. But once Madison became owners, then it would have to be negotiated with Madison. And and the question is how many spaces did does Madison uh allow uh in the auxiliary lease?

The auxiliary lease references the general use of the parking. It doesn't say, you know, uh spaces 23, 24, 25. It isn't that specific. So it talks about the right to use the common area and and it defines that as including the parking. So So, sounds like the the loosey goosey lease says that we can use as many spaces as we need.

It doesn't specifically limit it. That's correct. It's common area usage. I should, you know, to be more specific, I could go back and read that more closely, but I know it defined common areas as including the parking and that's what we pay for. That's the the common area maintenance expenses. That's why the the that amount is paid over to Madison because it's a share of the use of that common area. Just like in a shopping center, a tenant will pay part of the common area maintenance for the parking lot. So,

okay. And I guess uh my my last question is um geez, it just left me. My my last question uh has to do with um not never mind it's it's be totally so I'm sorry I know that my time is up but I have a question and it's just more about how um how did it came that this space doesn't have bathrooms and it has like how that came about. Excuse me. That that's uh is ancient history or like that like bad architectural design or Yes. Go ahead.

Okay. So, I would like to make a motion that uh the city attorney go ahead with enforcing historic preservation repairs for the building. Um and um we do not get into an agreement with Horton uh Orton at this time. And I just wanted to clarify when council member Wilson said that I feel comfortable having people there. It's up to the fire marshall to decide whether it's safe or not, not the council members. Of course, and it was just um I would like to second that, but the part about um the first part that you mentioned,

so can I just clarify was not agenda. What's before us tonight is the approval of the donation agreement. That's just that's what's before us. Okay. I make a motion that we deny it. I second. I'll bring another agenda item then for enforcing it. Do we need an agenda item or we can go ahead? Sorry. Can we have a roll call?

Council member Brown. Yes. Council member Ba. Yes. Council member Jimenez. No. Council member Wilson, no. Vice Mayor Robinson, abstain. Council member Zapeda.

Council member Zada. I thought I was unmuted. Yes. Can you hear me, Mayor? Yes. Mayor Martinez. Okay. No. Okay, the motion fails with Council Member Brown, Bana, and Zapeda voting yes. Council members Himemenz and Wilson and Mayor Martinez voting no, and Vice Mayor Robinson abstaining. Do I need to make a motion to approve the agreement if we want to approve it? I don't know what just happened. We voted no on rejecting it. To deny. Yeah.

No, we voted no to I'm sorry. I thought you said that doesn't pass either. We have to make a motion. Yes, we do. I know voter I don't understand what just happened. Can someone explain it to me? It's the same situation. Three. I'm asking I'm asking the city attorney explain. So, sorry. So, I think to make it cleaner, you know, if if you want to make the motion to approve the donation agreement, you can do do the vote. Um, I'd like to make a motion to approve the donation agreement. I say cond. It's going to be the same thing. So, right. I know, but I feel better.

Somebody voted to abstain. So, that person can change their position on the next vote. I mean anybody can but and I would also say it's my understanding if we don't let's say you end up not taking any action I think the message to Mr. Horton is that you did not vote to accept the donation and I think he'll move on from there awesome. Yes. Right. Okay. There was a motion by council member Robinson. No Wilson. Sorry, I didn't mean to yell. Okay, Council Member Wilson. Sorry.

Yes. Sorry about that. And a second by Council Member Jimenez to accept the donation. Correct. Council member Brown, no. Council member Bana, no. Council member Jimenez, yes. Council member Wilson, yes. Vice Mayor Robinson, no. Council member Zapeda, no. Mayor Martinez, yes.

Okay, the motion fails with Council Member Jimenez Wilson and Mayor Martinez voting yes. And then we have Council Member Brown Bana, Vice Mayor Robinson, and Council Members Apa voting no. Huh? Oh, yeah. That's right. I I almost forgot to adjourn. I'd liked being here so much, but we all do. I guess we are adjourned. Can I get a