City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening. I'd like to call to order the regular meeting of the Campbell City Council for Tuesday, May 19th, 2026. And I'd like to ask the clerk to call the roll, please.

Council Member Lopez.

Here.

Council Member Hines.

Present.

Council Member Scusola. Vice Mayor Bybee. Present. Mayor Furtado.

Here. Before we move to the Pledge of Allegiance, I have the following two announcements to make. First of all, the public hearing to consider the revocation of business licenses and tobacco retailer permits, as noticed in the Metro, will not be heard at tonight's meeting and will be brought forth at a future meeting with a date uncertain to the City Council. If there are any members of the public who came here tonight with the intention of testifying in this particular subject matter, you're welcome to do so under oral requests. Likewise, you may come back at the time when this is on the agenda and speak again, if you like, at that time. And also the public hearing for item 8.2 on tonight's agenda to consider the adoption of an interim ordinance identifying specific sites for exclusion from Senate Bill 79 will also not be heard tonight and will be heard at a future meeting of the city council with a date uncertain. Likewise, if there are any members of the public who are here tonight because you wanted to likewise speak on this matter because it was noticed on the agenda item... Senate Bill 79, you're welcome to do so also under oral requests. Likewise, when it is scheduled for a regular meeting of the City Council, you're welcome to come back at that time as well. So we will move on with the business and begin our meeting with the Pledge of Allegiance. And I'd like to invite the Director, Amy Olay, and members of the Public Works Department to please come forward and lead the Pledge of Allegiance tonight.

Ready?

I pledge allegiance 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.

I'll ask you to stay there for a moment or two. I'm going to come down. We're honoring members of the city's Public Works Department this evening because I have a proclamation to declare the week of May 17th through the 23rd as Public Works Week within the city. This event is celebrated every year at this time to honor and recognize members of public works departments for the work that they do oftentimes behind the scene. They maintain our streets and roads. They maintain our parks and our buildings and look after all of the city properties here to keep them in good working order. Likewise, they work on a number of special projects in terms of design and management. And these projects, of course, are extremely valuable to the community. In addition to that, it's the Public Works Department that coordinates the city's responsibilities with our joint powers authorities for stormwater management, solid waste and recycling, as well as sanitary waste. Each of those agencies have special joint powers authorities that have been established by the cities of Campbell, Los Gatos, Saratoga, and Montessorino. But it's our Public Works Department that manages that, particularly for us here in the city of Campbell. So I have a proclamation and likewise recognition of your leading the pledge. Congratulations on Public Works Week in the entire city for this month.

Just as he's coming down, I want to thank you as well, Public Works. I happened to drive west on Hamilton from San Tomas to what is the first M block in there. That street looked really good. So great job on that.

It's just a short.

Thank you very much for the acknowledgement and the recognition. It is really, you know, we're honored, the entire department, and I'm honored to have some of my key team players here joining me this evening. I mean, really, the theme this year with Public Works Week is rooted in service, powered by community, and it's truly what drives us, right? Because we are... Service is very important to us and we want to make the community as nice as possible for everyone that lives in the city of Campbell and for those that come visit our city. So thank you very much.

I'd also like to issue a proclamation declaring May 17th through the 24th as Hepatitis Awareness Week here in the city of Campbell. And I'd like to invite Walton Lee and members of the hepatitis B virus to the podium. Hepatitis B in particular is a serious form of hepatitis because it can have long-term residual effects. Hepatitis A is also something that spreads, not quite as serious. I might point out there are very good vaccines for both hepatitis A and hepatitis B. And persons should seriously consider getting vaccinated for hepatitis B. It requires three shots, but it's lifelong protection. So I want to thank members of the team for the work that you do in promoting awareness of hepatitis B virus. And we're pleased to present you with this proclamation. I know you've already interacted with over 500 people in the community, and we appreciate that very much.

Thank you for your participation today.

Good evening. My name is Walton Lee, and on behalf of Stanford Asian Liver Center and Team HPV San Jose, I'd like to thank Mayor Furtado, Vice Mayor Bybee, and the rest of the City Council for proclaiming May 18th through 24th as Hepatitis B Awareness Week here in Campbell City. And this year, I'm honored to be joined by some of our team members and two of our chapter's rising leaders, Dylan Lee and Lan An, who will share why this civic partnership and why this recognition means so much to our community.

Yeah, thank you, Walton. So to put hepatitis public health in perspective, HPV is a silent yet devastating liver infection, which disproportionately affects Asian and Pacific Islander communities. And that's combined without symptoms until it's too late. This is a local reality with a quarter of Camp Bell's residents identifying as Asian. making it a highly dense AAPI community, coupled with the fact that two-thirds of those living with HPV are unaware that they have it. The orchid city is on the front lines of an epidemic. Luckily, HPV is preventable through vaccination and early screening, which is why awareness is so important and why Campbell's support matters so much. Thank you.

The timing of Hepatitis B Awareness Week is highly intentional, coinciding with Hepatitis Awareness Month as well as Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month. This hopefully will be a staunch reminder of the communities most affected by the silent epidemic. Mayor Furtado and Council, your city's proclamation is not just a recognition of Hepatitis B awareness efforts. It is a reminder of what can be achieved when a community comes together in the interest of public health. Thank you once again to the Council for your leadership, as well as for your help in making this crisis visible. Thank you.

Thank you.

May is a busy month, and so I'd also like to issue a proclamation. to honor affordable housing month. And I'd like to ask Corey Wolbach to come forward. to receive this proclamation. I might mention that throughout all of California, there's been a really strong effort to provide more housing, especially affordable housing. And we here in Campbell, likewise participate in this process and both encourage and also mandate for some of the larger developments, a certain level of housing be affordable. Nevertheless, I know housing is still expensive, but we and other cities want to do our part to participate as best we can. And so for you, likewise, I'm coming down to give you proclamations. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Good evening. Honourable Mayor.

Let's try that again. Good evening again, honorable mayor, council members, and hardworking city staff. Again, my name is Corey Wolbach. I'm the civic leadership manager at SB at Home. Thank you so much for inviting us to celebrate Affordable Housing Month with you. We're really proud to receive Campbell's proclamation and really glad to see that this important recognition is being made, highlighting how critical affordable housing is for our community throughout Silicon Valley. As a local nonprofit, SP at Home advocates for really practical solutions to meet the housing needs of residents across Santa Clara County. Our theme for affordable housing month this year is all in for housing. We're excited to coordinate dozens of events throughout the month hosted by SVA at Home and our many partners. And we encourage everyone to visit siliconvalleyathome.org to find virtual and in-person events where you can learn and connect with your neighbors. It's no secret that our housing need remains quite great. in every city and town in Santa Clara County. Nearly half of Santa Clara County's renters are cost burdened. Too many of our residents, as we know, have been priced out of their homes, some out of the region entirely, and local cities, school districts, and small businesses, all kinds of employers are struggling to recruit and retain talent in large part due to housing costs. That's why your continued leadership is so essential. Our work focuses on the three P's, production, preservation, and protection. That means we need to produce a lot more housing, especially affordable housing. We need to preserve the affordable housing we have and we need to protect tenants from housing instability. By investing in affordable housing, we are securing our future and the well-being of all of our residents and our community. So we invite everybody to join us in envisioning, planning, and creating a future where everyone in Silicon Valley has access to a safe, stable, and affordable home. Thank you again for your partnership and leadership of this Affordable Housing Month.

We have no communications and petitions, and now we move to oral requests. This is the time on this evening's agenda for any member of the public to address the council on an item that is not on tonight's agenda. And if you'd like to address the council, you're welcome to do so. We request that you fill out a card to let us know you'd like to speak. You're not required to do so. I will call those who have given me cards. So first I'll ask Ken Johnson to say something. Good evening, Ken.

Good evening, Mr. Mayor, honorable members of the city council. Ken Johnson, a very tired executive director from the Campbell Chamber of Commerce. Just want to give you a report on the Boogie Festival this weekend. By far, our best attended. If you were there, and a lot of you were, I appreciate that. I also wanted to start by thanking the city staff. Brian, you and Angelique was awesome to deal with. Nathan, a great supporter of what we're trying to do. Chief, great staff. Spencer is a player for sure. A real pleasure to work with. And I wish Public Works was still here because they, you talk about service, you guys provide that. So Matthew, Ishmael, Ron, all great people. So very happy with the way that all went down. We introduced a lot of people to Campbell. We had over 1 million impressions on our social media. If you were on social media, you saw it. We had over 450,000 views. That means people actually interacted with what we posted on Facebook. We had over 100,000 views on Instagram. So great exposure for the city of Campbell. 95% of the people that viewed our Instagram don't follow us, but a lot of them do now. So we're very happy with that. It was a very safe, fun weekend for families. We had over 1,000 kids in the kid zone, including Highline in the Parks and Rec Department that had a space in there. I understand there was one arrest not related to the festival. So that's always, I hate to judge a festival, but we're very happy that with 35, 40,000 people down here, we had one arrest not related to us.

How'd the racetrack go?

Well, that's what I really want to thank. I mean, we took a chance. That's why Angelique and Spencer and Matthew and also Chief Murphy, Deputy Chief Murphy from Santa Clara County Fire, who actually discovered whether a racetrack format was a code or a discretion. Turns out it was discretion. So we tried it. We're going to evaluate it. You know, Nathan's now starting to understand the stuff that we hear from the retailers downtown about the pressure. So we want to, it's more important for us that we service our retailers downtown. So it was worth trying and overall the feedback was good. We'll see. We got out on time, which was great. Also want to mention over 200 volunteers in the community who came and served and over 18 local bands who played on four stages, including a high school battle of the bands on Sunday on the community stage. And the winner of that will play as an opening act at Oktoberfest in October. So thank you very much for supporting the chamber. I'm going to stay for a while. I'll stay as long as I can. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Tim. I'd like to invite Susan Landry to the podium.

Good evening, Council, Honorable Mayor, and Council members. I had a card for SB 79 that now you said to speak under here, but I also had public comment. So do I get four minutes or two minutes?

Yes, you get four.

Oh, wow. OK. So first, I would like to distribute a letter. have seen this before. Last time I came and spoke, Dan Furtado had signed on or had considered signing a letter to the state legislators about putting a pause on any new housing laws. He has since told me he has signed the letter and has submitted it to Mark Berman. And I just am here in support of this initiative. The housing laws have been coming way too fast, way too quick, have far too many impacts, and we're not having a chance to catch up and find out what these impacts really are. We embraced the housing element for the sixth round. We designated 4,000 units for our 2,700 we were supposed to have. That was what we thought we needed. And now with SB 79, they're saying there could be up to something like 40,000 units if the SB 79 takes effect. And so I'm here asking that the council support no new legislation on housing until they resolve what's going on, and not during this RENA cycle, and really try to push back on this SB 79. The cumulative impacts of that have not been evaluated. The utilities, infrastructure, parks, all that stuff. We can have housing, which I totally support housing, but let's work on getting the peripheral amenities that we need. Okay, now I'm gonna talk about SB 79. Thank you for the extra time. My understanding and reading as much as I can about all the state legislation, there is no legal nexus, no legal connection that requires the VTA or any other public transit to maintain the existing stops at the frequency that is currently used to allow all this housing. So the Senate bills do talk about if it's a state mandated rail line, you can't change that, but they only support and encourage cities to deal with public transit. But as far as I know, I cannot find anything that says there is a legal nexus that you cannot change a route and you cannot stop the frequency. So what happens when we build all this housing near the light rail and the light rail decides we don't, the VTA decides we don't have enough people and they cut it to one train a day. That's not fair. We need housing. Housing is permanent and we need to really understand the impacts of all of this housing on Campbell, on Campbell's budget, on our community and our infrastructure. Thank you.

Thank you. I might mention that the letter I and four other mayors signed went to the Speaker of the State Assembly, Speaker Rivas.

Oh, okay, I'm sorry, I said Mark Berman, but yes, in other cities.

And the letter we signed was asking them to pause further housing bills until they can sort out all the bills that they passed. Last year, 50 bills alone relating to affordable housing and housing in general. And the department, as well as our department, is still trying to sort through all the rules and regulations in those 50 different bills. Thank you.

And all the cities here, not only in the Santa Clara County, but the whole state are dealing with the same thing. But I would like an answer if you guys know about the nexus with the public transportation.

Thank you. I have no other cards. Is there anyone online that wants to speak under oral requests that you're aware of?

Yes, we do have a speaker with their hand raised. Benjamin, would you like to speak under oral requests?

Yes, thank you. Go ahead. Several months ago, I read an article saying that Campbell has ended its deal with Flock, which I was really excited about. But I can't help but notice that I'm still seeing cameras everywhere on every street corner that I can't So I'm just wondering when the cameras will be taken down and when we can finally move freely without this constant threat of surveillance.

Thank you. Many of those cameras are associated with the stoplights and they regulate the traffic and cause the stop signals to change at different times. So that is done in lieu of the sensors that normally were found under the street. So that's what probably most of the cameras you're seeing are for. But the city of Campbell still does have its own license plate reader system, which we will continue. But it's an internal system that is not susceptible or available to persons outside the city.

Where can I learn more about this? My problem is with license plate readers in general, not any particular vendor.

Yes, you can contact the police department and they will be happy to provide you additional information. So just stop by or call them on the phone. Thank you. I have no other cards. Does anyone else wish to speak on oral requests? This is for something that's not on tonight's agenda.

Thank you for taking your time. I want to just say a few things. Affordable housing. We hear about, we want to do affordable housing. Is there a number for Campbell? I mean, like a dollar sign number. Everybody talks about affordable housing. What is Campbell's affordable housing? How do we know how to... build affordable housing without a number that we want to get to. And is there organization, is there anywhere I can just go just to talk to find out what is affordable housing? I mean, it's a word. I know what it is, but affordable for who, for how much? It seems like there needs to be a number that doesn't ever seem to be a number. And you know how you know okay well we're gonna but whatever even like these sb 1123 we're gonna put nine homes ten homes in one lot well there is that an affordable home is there enough how do you know it's affordable you know um or apartments you know townhome apartments whatever you go with the rent what's an affordable rent number I just don't know. I was just wondering if there's any way, do you guys discuss that? Or like Gary was here, but he left. I wanted to talk to him. How do you decide what's affordable? You know, and that is kind of my, because I just hear the word, but I don't know how people are going to do it, accomplish it. Or, you know, because like they'll build these homes and they want to sell them for 1.5 million. Well, is that affordable? Yeah. you know, for who and what or how, who we want to make it affordable. There's got to be a number and then how we want to do it. So I don't know. I just wish there was somebody or somehow a discussion you can be in just to, I'm really curious how they do it, how they... So that was just, all right, so.

I just briefly mentioned that there are standards, there are rules, there are definitions of affordable housing, and you can stop by or call the planning department sometime and someone will be happy to chat with you further and sort of go through the procedures and how we make those determinations here for our state. We can't really discuss it tonight.

Oh, no, no, no, no, I didn't want you to. That was just a thought that I had.

And I would encourage the speaker to visit SV at Home, which was the person who was here before, and they have all sorts of resources.

Right, that's why I wanted to talk to him. He just kind of got out before I was there. Okay, and I think his name is Gary?

Cory.

Cory, Cory, okay. SV at Home. SV at Home, okay, good. All right, thank you, thank you.

Anyone else wish to speak under oral requests? Sorry about that. So we have the following announcements. We invite you to join the Campbell Veterans Memorial Foundation in honoring the men and women who have died while serving in the United States military. The Campbell Veterans Memorial Foundation hosts the annual Memorial Day ceremony on the green right outside in the back of City Hall in the open space there between City Hall and the library. In case of inclement weather, the ceremony will be moved inside the building. And that begins at 9 a.m. on Monday, the 25th, which is, of course, Memorial Day, and it finishes by 10 o'clock. Likewise, city offices will be closed on that Monday, Memorial Day, May 25th, and observance Memorial Day. Obviously, the police department and emergency services are available seven days a week, 24 hours a day. So they do remain open. Campbell does welcome residents and visitors to the historic Campbell Car Show, something that we have been supporting over the last few years. It will occur this year on Saturday, June 6th, one of the region's premier automotive events and very well liked and respected within the community. So we have... They are displayed from classic cruisers to custom builds, and this annual event brings together car enthusiasts, local businesses, families, and visitors for a day. It's celebrated right in downtown. The next item is with respect to the Heritage Theater. The theater will present, quote, staying alive one night with Bee Gees at 7.30 p.m. on Saturday, June 13th. So we encourage you to consider coming to that event. There'll be a number of Bee Gees tunes that will be played and sung at that event. So June 13th at 7.30 at the theater. And also our Campbell Recreation Department offers a variety of fun and engaging summer programs for children and teens. There are summer camps that provide a safe environment where participants can develop social skills. They can stay active and enjoy both arts and crafts and games and outdoor exploration. And the camp, the specific camp runs during the week of June 15th or during the time period of June 15th through August 7th. And you can sign up through our recreation department or visit the city website and find their proper location under recreation and arts, campbellca.gov. Those are the official announcements for this evening. And so now we move to the consent calendar. The consent calendar this evening consists of items 7.1 to 7.8. And item 7.8 does include a desk item I referenced to the council, which will be incorporated in the potential motion and passage of that item. the council as i said we'll take that as a single motion unless a member of the council a member of staff or a member of the public would like us to pull an item for further discussion does anyone wish to pull an item from the consent calendar seeing none i'm ready for a motion if someone would like to do so i'll move the consent calendar items uh 7.1 through 7.8 including the desk item on item 7.8 I'll second. Motion by the Vice Mayor and Bybee, second by Council Member Hines. Roll call, please.

Council Member Lopez.

Aye.

Council Member Hines. Aye. Vice Mayor Bybee. Aye. Mayor Furtado.

Aye. We now move to item number eight, public hearings and the introduction of ordinances. And first we will go to item 8.1. This is a public hearing to consider the adoption of an ordinance extending the interim ordinance number 26-2347, which continues the implementation of the Starter Home Revitalization Act with a revised method of applying vacancy requirements to single family residential properties. This is an ordinance and it would require four positive votes of the city council to pass this tonight because it's an urgency ordinance. And I'd like to call on Senior Planner Daniel Fama to make the staff presentation.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council. CSP4U is an ordinance that would extend the interim ordinance that was adopted by the City Council at its meeting of April 21st. That ordinance did reestablish the urgency measures that had been adopted last year to implement the Starter Home Revitalization Act. Plus amended by Senate Bill 1123, the ordinance made a tailored revision to the prior legislation that revised how the city applies its vacancy requirements. The ordinance now requires that a property be vacant if it's in a single family zone at timeless middle, which is material change from prior when vacancy could be established later in the process. That ordinance is currently set to expire in June 5th. So the ordinance before you would extend it for 10 months and 15 days as allowed by the government code, taking it through April 20th of 2027, or unless it is superseded by a new interim ordinance or permanent ordinance of the City Council. Additionally, in terms of an update, at the April 21st meeting, the council also provided direction to staff to explore preparation of a demolition control ordinance in consultation with the State Housing Community Development Department. Staff did meet with HCD staff earlier this week. They did appear to be receptive to providing a formal response to our technical request that was incorporated into your council packet. They indicated that a response could take two to three months. And with that, staff does recommend that the Council adopt the attached ordinance extending Ordinance 262347 for a period of 10 months and 15 days. And if the Council has any questions, I'm ready to answer them.

Thank you. Thanks for the presentation. Any questions by members of the Council?

Could I ask with the the timeframe we heard from HCD, which is just not a surprise. We heard that at the most recent meeting. How do you plan to incorporate that in a future update to this ordinance?

Well, their in-frame meeting, their response is going to materially inform how the city approaches demolition control ordinance. So it's pretty imperative we understand their position before we develop a new ordinance.

and and that doesn't play into um just so the public understands this the current extension correct yeah yeah it's a separate track yeah okay thanks

Okay, thank you. So this is a public hearing and I will open the public hearing on this subject and invite members of the public to speak on this item 8.1 if you would like to do so and ask that you approach the podium.

Good evening.

Thank you. Good evening, counsel. My name is Robin. I'm an attorney with a firm called Hanson Bridget, and I'm here speaking on behalf of EMB Law. And to speak on this item today, I did take the time to review some of the prior hearings, and I thought it was important to appear and make some clarifications as far as to help As you consider what to do next over the period of this 10-month interim ordinance, I think it's important to reinforce how these housing laws operate. SB 1123, similar to numerous other state housing laws, are designed to be minimum thresholds that cities must comply with in order to facilitate housing production. I heard a lot of comments during the last meeting sort of asserting that the city had very limited discretion on how to implement SB 1123. And that would be true if the intent was to try to limit or stall housing production. These state laws are designed to facilitate housing protection. So when the city took an interpretation of the vacancy provision, And from the comments that I heard from Community Development Director Mr. Eastwood, those all seem like very reasonable interpretations on how to implement SB 1123 via local ordinance. Granted, it may have been a more expansive interpretation than the minimum threshold that was provided by state housing law. But again, this idea that the city is prohibited from taking that more expansive interpretation is pretty contrary to how this law and nearly all the other state housing laws were designed to operate. So people can debate whether it's a good policy, whether it's a bad policy, but the idea that the city council had no discretion to interpret the vacancy provision, I think is problematic. And I think it's important for the city council to consider that going forward. The other comment on the demolition control ordinance is that there's some serious property rights implications associated with trying to make a condition where you have to rebuild a house in order to get a demolition permit. So I think YMBA law and numerous other organizations will be watching how that ordinance evolves over the next 10 months.

Thank you. Thank you. Does anyone else wish to speak on this item?

Yes, we do. My apologies.

Hey, Raja Palala, 1216 West Hacienda. Good to see you folks again in person. Quickly, Campbell is already a fully built-out city, so finding lots where the housing for missing middle can be built is very tough. That's where the half-acre lots are, the 20,000 square feet, 10,000 square feet lots come to the scenario. St. Thomas neighborhood, which constitutes, I think, roughly about two-thirds, of residential area has the largest lots available to build housing for missing middle. I'm not quoting affordable. I'm not quoting like ultra low. I'm saying the missing middle. 10,000 square feet lots, 60,000 square feet lots with like 2,000 square feet homes. city council should think is that appropriate use of land use. I urge this esteemed council to think about making neighborhoods inclusive, not just affordable. City staff has spent a lot of time, even city council on general plan updates, housing element updates and things like that. So coming back again, revisiting these things that were already passed, I don't know who it is benefiting. One thing I want to say is it was very disappointing to see that the council allowed comments, very stereotypical, calling out nationalities and things like that about businesses and things. And it was still on record, right? It was part of the recording. I urge the city to remove those kinds of recordings, highlighting or calling out, hey, you know, citizens of so-and-so nation are doing this kind of investments. We would be happy to you know, invite Foxconn to set up a big, you know, 10,000 people working facility, then why can't they invest in, you know, building homes and things like that, even if what was quoted was true. So that I felt like if we do the same thing for anyone coming into South America or something, this council would not have allowed that. So I think that's a little disappointing. And I don't think that's the right thing to allow to call out nationalities, even for business or individuals. Thank you.

Thank you. And we have a person online.

Yes, Chris Lindsay, would you like to speak on this item?

Hi, can you hear me?

Yes.

Yes. Hi, this is Chris Lindsey. My address is 322 Industrial Street. I commend the City Council for declaring this month as Affordable Housing Month. And I think today is a perfect time to show that commitment. Campbell had a number of starter homes in development, but the recent redefinition of the vacancy requirement will be an impediment to affordable housing development. If developers need to wait for housing site to be demolished first before attaining that building permit, it just adds delay in cost, which overall reduces the financial viability of development. And developers will naturally favor building elsewhere. So I ask that in the spirit of promoting affordable housing that the council vote no on item 8.1 tonight. Thank you.

Does anyone else wish to speak on this item? Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing and invite the members of the council to make comments if they wish.

Yeah, I just wanted to make one comment relative to the breadth of comments that were made last time. The city staff is doing an excellent job of interpreting, reconciling and recommending policies and ordinances for implementation. The ultimate decision and accountability for decisions is with the city council and residents should direct feedback to council and not single out staff members, please.

If there's no other comments, what is the pleasure of the council on this item?

I'll go ahead and move the staff recommendation that the city council adopt an ordinance to extend interim ordinance number 26-2347 for a period of 10 months and 15 days.

I'll second. Motion by the vice mayor, second by council member Hines, and we'll have roll call, please.

Council Member Lopez?

No.

Council Member Hines?

Aye.

Vice Mayor Bybee? Aye. Mayor Furtado?

Aye. The item does not pass because it requires a four-fifths vote.

Okay.

We now move to item 8.2. And this item will not be heard on tonight's meeting, as I mentioned earlier. And so we'll go on to item 8.3. This is a public hearing pursuant to government code section 3502.3 to receive a report on the city of Campbell vacancies and recruitment and retention as required by law. And this evening, the staff presentation will be presented by our director of personnel.

Good evening, honorable mayor and council members. My name is Ada Chang, HR manager. Excuse me while I pull up the slideshow. So today I'm bringing forward a public hearing item in compliance with Assembly Bill 2561, which was signed into law September 22nd, 2025. and codified in government code 3502.3. This law requires all public agencies to hold a public hearing on staffing vacancies and report on our recruitment and retention efforts. It is also required that this presentation be done prior to the adoption of our final budget for the upcoming fiscal year. This assembly bill came to be because California legislature recognized that job vacancies in local government are a widespread and significant problem for public sector with high job vacancies that impact public service delivery and the workers who handle the heavier workloads. Therefore, there's a statewide interest in ensuring that public agency operations are appropriately staffed and that high vacancy rates do not undermine public employee labor relations. So in order to be in compliance, staff is required to present the following information, which include the status of vacancies, information on our recruitment and retention efforts, and also the obstacles in policies, procedures, and recruitment activity that may create challenges in our hiring processes. There are also additional reporting requirements if a single bargaining unit has job vacancies that meet or exceed 20%, which include the four that you see up there, which are the total number of job vacancies within a bargaining unit, the total number of applicants for vacant positions within that bargaining unit, the average number of days to complete the hiring process when a position is posted, and opportunities to improve compensation and other working conditions. So this chart you see displayed in front of you are the budget positions and vacancies in each bargaining unit as of April 15, 2026. We use April 15th because that was the date the report was pulled in order to get our item in time in our agenda management system. And so as you see, as of that date, none of the groups are over the 28% threshold. Only acknowledge that that date was about a month ago. So for our recruitment and retention efforts, the city has been working on our ongoing efforts. We recognize that we all have competing priorities across our departments. So department heads work as a team to discuss and prioritize the city's recruitments. Really, the philosophy is to address vacancies based on operational priority, where we consider the positions that are most needed across the city for both continued service to the public, as well as the workload of staff. We have worked on finding new ways to advertise our recruitment, such as mailers to people who possess certain certifications that are required for positions and targeting our advertising on related associations websites. And we recognize the importance of not just recruiting for new employees, but also retaining the employees that we have. We have increased our push to offer additional trainings to our staff that either strengthen their expertise in their current role or will prepare them for the next role within their career path with the city. And whenever we do have turnover, HR staff conducts exit interviews to figure out if there are any operational or workplace culture improvements we can implement. And we also try to be proactive in that the city manager's office conducts an annual employee survey to receive feedback from staff to see how they feel about Campbell as an employer. We're also working towards providing staff in the anonymous electronic form for them to provide ongoing feedback. So some of the challenges we came across this fiscal year are the budget considerations and the direction of freeze positions. While we, on the HR side, were very fortunate to fill our HR representative role, the HR analyst does remain frozen, and this HR analyst position is the primary position that is recruiting for positions. There were also a number of other positions citywide that were frozen, so those could not have been filled during this time. This year we experienced some turnover in quite a few positions and we have worked towards getting feedback from those employees on areas we can focus on for retention. And another consideration is that we're also competing for the same candidate pool as our other local agencies are. But all that being said, there's always opportunities for improvement. So firstly, If able, we would love to fill the HR analyst position, which will give us the ability to address recruitment at a faster pace and assist with strategizing retention efforts. Budget permitting, we will continue to strive to keep our salaries and benefits as competitive as we can with the local labor market. and also hope to unfreeze some of those positions that we had this year. And through our exit interviews and our annual employee survey, HR has been given insight as to the reasons for staff leaving and feedback on areas of improvement. So we hope to use that valuable information from our exit interviews to help make meaningful changes to improve retention. And we do plan to work closely with our departments to share some of the broad information we've been given so that the feedback is being taken into consideration department by department. And in terms of retention, one of the ongoing work plan items is to expand our internal trainings so that we can further the development of city staff who are here. And one of those has already been able to be kicked off by us holding a joint supervisory training opportunity with four of our other West Valley agencies. At this time, I understand some of our bargaining units are here and they would also like to speak. So I wanted to go ahead and invite a representative from CPC.

Is this part of your staff report? Yes.

Oh, I'm sorry.

I will try to keep this at two minutes. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, council members, city manager, and city staff. My name is Kelly Alvarado. I'm the president of CPCEA. I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight on behalf of our union regarding staffing, recruitment, and retention.

The public hearing is not open yet, and this is actually a public comment. It's not a part of the staff report.

As part of the item, the bargaining units were welcome to come up and speak as part of the presentation, but we can, if you'd like to . Okay, we can take it as part of the oral communication and then after the barking units, we'll open it up to the public as well. But if you would like to.

So it's a discretion of the mayor. So we'll take public comments. If the discretion of the mayor is to allow them to speak first, we'll go ahead and do that. But it should be part of the public comment. Yeah.

I wait. Yeah. Okay.

I'm sorry, that would be considered a public comment or a comment, yes. So do you have some additional comments yourself?

No, that was the end of my portion of the presentation.

Oh, okay. Then I will first of all ask if there are questions from members of the council.

Yeah, thank you. A very, very thorough presentation. The spreadsheet of the vacancies was from April. Any change in that up till now?

There have been some changes.

We have had... Can you pull it up and tell me which... Pull up that slide.

Oh, the slide itself?

Yeah. And just, you know, which... What changes have been seen?

So I believe, if my recollection is correct, that CPCEA would have one additional vacant position, but also one additional filled... Oh, sorry, two additional vacant positions, but one has been filled again. So... a net of one. And then with CPOA, we did have turnover of two staff, but we also just hired two staff.

Okay. All right. And are the frozen positions, the vacant positions or?

No, frozen positions are not included because they were not authorized to be filled since they were frozen for the year.

Okay.

So there are a number of frozen positions. Okay.

All right. Thank you. I have a question.

So on your previous, one of the previous screens you talked about, next to the last screen, I think, this one here, implementing changes based on exit interviews and employee feedback. So is that a new strategy that's occurring or, because it was my understanding that when employees left, there was always an exit interview. Where did that information go? Did that stay with HR or was that discussed at the staff level prior to this?

Yeah, thank you. So we have had always conducted exit interviews. Before my time with the city, I'm not entirely sure how that information was given, but I do know there was a gap between when I arrived and when the previous HR team was here. So while exit interview information was taken, it may not have been digested or shared to the extent that we're hoping to help each department with the specific information we're being given from the employees.

Okay. And with your analysis, I mean, we've had a lot of employee turnover. Is there any one or a couple of reasons why that's occurring consistently across the organization? Or is it kind of on an individual basis based on the individual employees' needs or desires?

Yeah, good question. So if I were to look at the commonalities, a lot of the turnover is based on either promotional or higher-paying opportunities in other agencies, but there are also some internal improvements that they've shared that we could be making within the city to help with retention.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, thank you. Seeing no other comments or questions by the council. Thank you. And so now I will open the public hearing for comments on this matter. I apologize. And now is the appropriate time for you to speak.

Sorry for the confusion. Okay, so again, good evening, Mr. Mayor, council members, city manager and city staff. My name is Kelly Alvarado and I am the president of the CPC EA. I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight on behalf of our union regarding the staffing recruitment and retention issues. Currently, the newer numbers that I have, we have 21.75 budgeted positions. And as of this week, we'll be losing another so that gives us 4.75 vacancies that doesn't include the frozen spot, giving us roughly just under 22%. While the numbers might seem manageable on paper, the reality of the daily operations is more significant. Vacancies increase workload demands on existing staff and require greater reliance on overtime to maintain minimum staffing levels. HCPCA classification plays a critical role in supporting police operations. Dispatch vacancies affect officer response coordination, situational awareness, and officer safety. Record shortages can delay report processing, public records requests, data entry, and case management support. CSO vacancies reduce the department's ability to handle traffic-related incidents, parking enforcement, and lower priority calls. And these have already placed more work on the shoulders of our police officers. Recruitment is challenging as we're competing in a highly competitive regional job market to staff specialized positions that require non-traditional and demanding work schedules. CBCA appreciates the city's attention to these challenges, and we recognize the ongoing efforts that are already being made. Addressing staffing challenges proactively will help maintain the level of service that Campbell residents deserve and have come to respect. Committing to retention-focused strategies such as offering longevity benefits, identifying recruitment incentives, and keeping pay and total compensation competitive with surrounding agencies will help long-term employee stability, which will in turn support department-wide sustainability. We would ask council to look beyond temporary budget constraints and invest in incentives to attract and retain quality employees. Thanks for your time.

Thank you. I certainly do agree that as dispatchers, you do very important work for us as well as our public records, police records specialists. So thank you so much. We have a representative from the CPOA here.

Good evening, Mr. Mayor and honorable members of the council. I apologize, I'm going to speak fast because I have a lot to get through within two minutes. So my name is Matt Ryan. I'm speaking on behalf of the Campbell Police Officers Association. Vice President Lee Heitzman is with me. So as you know, the city's numbers were based off, were in effect as of April 15th and showed 38 current officers. I just want to shed some light on those numbers and what we're actually operating with. Since last fall, we've lost six experienced officers to surrounding agencies that offer better pay, more competitive benefits. Those losses included three active detectives, two former detectives, one of whom had been promoted to agent, and an officer with more than 17 years of experience. With their departures, the department lost years of training, experience, and institutional knowledge that had invested in developing these officers. Two more of those 38 officers referenced in the city's presentation have been on long-term injury for over two years and are unlikely to return. While we're excited that a new officer graduated from Police Academy last week and is beginning his field training, this officer is still approximately five months away from being able to operate as a solo beat officer. So the reality is that as of this evening, we only have 33 operationally ready officers. Of the 19 members currently on patrol who hold the rank of officer, 12 have less than two years of solo patrol experience. That level of inexperience increases demands on the small number of seasoned officers we have left and impacts consistency decision-making and places even greater stress on the officers who are already being asked to perform an increasingly demanding job. While the POA understands the severity of the budget crisis that Measure K will hopefully fix, the city must take immediate steps to retain the officers we currently have and fill our vacant positions before we lose even more officers to surrounding agencies. For multiple contract cycles now, the city has offered substantially similar terms, monetary adjustments, and benefit structures across all bargaining groups. From the POA's perspective, this approach fails to recognize the unique operational demands, staffing challenges, retention issues, and around-the-clock responsibilities associated with law enforcement services. This has had a noticeable impact on morale on our members, as many officers feel the realities and pressures facing our law enforcement personnel are not being individually evaluated or addressed. If I may just finish real quick. We're bringing this forward not as a criticism, but as a part of a collaborative effort to ensure the city understands the operational reality behind the numbers presented tonight. Our goal is to work together on solutions that improve recruitment and strengthen retention. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Would anyone else like to speak on this matter? Seeing none, I will close the public hearing and invite members of the council for comment or motion.

I'll just make a comment how much I appreciate the candor and transparency from the commenters who spoke on this. And my feedback from staff would be just that I truly appreciate this report and being able to dig into the issues and have the broader perspective of how we're doing. And I would just request, as we continue to think about vacancies, to make sure, you know, we heard from two of the groups about the impacts and that that's deeply valuable. My request would be for HR and for the city manager's office, as we're looking across the entire organization, that we're making sure that we're being strategic with our vacancies. I know some level that is required and that we've discuss and we'll be adopting some of that, that we can make sure that as I've brought up in the past, just use a phrase that we're not being penny wise and pound foolish in terms of where we can drive the impact, the operational efficiency, potentially savings or revenue generators within those positions. So I would just ask that you continue to focus in those areas. I think we've done a good job of being strategic, but it really requires us to keep diving in. And again, that's separate and apart from the specific comments that the commenters and the bargaining groups brought up, which we'll continue to look at.

Thank you.

Council Member Hines.

Sorry, I didn't see you.

That's okay. Go ahead.

Thank you very much. Excellent presentation. Excellent to hear from the bargaining units. You know, the frozen positions, I think leaving those out kind of makes it look a little better. So I think we want to make sure that we take into account those frozen positions as well. But I think it's excellent feedback that I'm hearing. Here, focus on staffing retention benefits, focus on retention. I think we heard that twice in recruitment. And the junior aspect of the departments are a serious issue. And every time I run into a San Jose PD, they thank me for the recruiting efforts that they do. So I think we really gotta keep attention and focus on this.

I just want to acknowledge the two groups that have come forward and shared your experience and your concerns and your frustration, somewhat frustration. Beyond that, I just want to say that we're in the process of meet and confer, and it is a confidential process, and so really to have a dialogue going back and forth would be inappropriate at this time. Thank you.

And I might add, yes, we are currently in the meet and confer for all of our labor groups, and we will continue that process. I will say that the council and the staff sometime back anticipated a potential shortfall of cash. And we, in fact, addressed that preemptively by placing on the ballot measure K, which was passed overwhelmingly by the voters of Campbell only requiring a 50% vote and it actually got a 72% vote. It actually was greater than a two thirds vote that would otherwise be required for some elections. So we did all of these things and complied to the letter of the law with the law, what the law said. And as many people know, unfortunately we were sued by the Silicon Valley Taxpayers Group who were opposed to all taxes. The matter went to the Superior Court and we won every argument at the Superior Court level, but then they decided to appeal to the Appellate Court. And the Appellate Court just received from the Superior Court the certified copy of the proceedings, which now allows the appellate court to go ahead and schedule hearings. And some of those hearings have been scheduled. So this process, not to our fault by any means, has taken much longer than we anticipated. In the meantime, however, we have been permitted to to collect the increase in tax and we have collected it. It is currently sequestered and it's earning interest. So we hope for a favorable outcome from the appellate court at which time funds will be released, which will allow us among other needs of the city to fill some of our positions which are being frozen and held at the present time. So I felt it was important to point this out and I did so. So now it's up to members of the council to, I would request a motion to accept the report.

I will motion to accept the report of the public hearing pursuant to government code section 3502.3 to receive a report of the city council vacancies and recruitment and retention efforts. Second.

Thank you. Motion by Council Member Hines, second by Council Member Lopez. We'll have roll call, please.

Council Member Lopez. Aye. Council Member Hines. Aye. Vice Mayor Beebe. Aye. Mayor Furtado.

Aye. We now move to item 8.4. This is the annual required report due to Assembly Bill 481, Military Equipment Annual Report. This is a report of the military equipment that we had this past year in 2025. And the staff report will be presented by Police Captain Brad Rice.

All right, good evening, Mayor, Honorable Mayor.

Let me start again. Good evening, Mayor, Honorable Council Members. My presentation tonight is gonna center around some of the requirements set forth by Assembly Bill 481, which I'll be referring to as AB 481. In 2021, Governor Newsom signed into law AB 41, which stated that the public has a right to know and participate in the decision-making process related to the funding, acquisition or use of military equipment by state or local government officials. This was done in an effort to increase transparency, accountability and oversight, in addition to providing safeguard to protect the public's welfare, safety, civil rights and liberties. The bill also created a public forum for input and engagement in addition to annual reporting and approval requirements for the continued use of the equipment. The equipment is needed to help provide a safer, peaceful resolution for the involved parties, the public, and the officers involved. The equipment most often affords us additional time to make decisions. It provides great distance from potential threats and cover for protection. This allows us to better evaluate the actions, capabilities, and intentions of the involved subject or subjects. In April 2025, Council approved the continued use of resources defined as military equipment in our possession. One ongoing requirement of AB 41 is the police department must complete an annual report to include inventory, usage, future acquisitions, document internal audits, summarize community feedback, identify the cost and funding source. The report attached to the council report is the annual report for 2025, which covers the entire calendar year of 2025, satisfying this requirement. Last week, a community meeting was held to discuss this report and there were no negative comments or feedback. One other requirement of AB 41 is that the city council review and approve the use of military equipment annually with the following criteria. With following criteria, excuse me. The military equipment is necessary because there is no reasonable alternative that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety. If purchasing the equipment, the equipment is reasonably cost-effective compared to available alternatives that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety. The proposed military equipment use policy will safeguard the public's welfare, safety, civil rights, and civil liberties. Based on the 2025 Annual Use Report and the requirements set forth in AB 41 and Ordinance 2280, staff recommends that the City Council adopt the resolution finding that each type of military equipment identified in the report has complied with the standards set forth in Ordinance 2280 and introduce an ordinance renewing City of Campbell Ordinance 2280 per the requirements. With the approval of staff's recommendation, the police department would continue to have access to the resources currently available. The current policies and procedures would remain in effect and we would continue the current tracking system to prepare for next year's report. Without the approval of the equipment or specific equipment designated by the council not to be used, we would cease the use of the identified equipment immediately. This was causing the redesign of our policies and procedures. Operations for critical incident response would include our ability to provide and receive mutual aid. Public safety would negatively be impacted and our less lethal options would be reduced. And just on the entire military use report, officers minimally receive yearly training, if not more, but just to cover that and I can answer those specifics. But thank you for your time and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you, Brad. Questions by members of the council?

Can I just ask? Thank you very much, officer. Appreciate that. The policy that you're asking for, it's not listed, but what we're asking, you're asking us here is to approve the policy 709 that you... 7709. 7709. Okay, thank you.

Council Member Lopez? No, I'm sorry. I appreciate the report. My light was left on.

And just to clarify, I believe it's government code 7709 and the ordinance is 2280. 77 is the government code, excuse me. Okay, thank you.

Thank you for the clarification that now I'm following. Okay, thank you.

We have no other questions. Thank you. So this is a public hearing. And I will therefore open the public hearing. Would any member of the public like to comment on this matter?

Good evening again. I wasn't going to speak, but I just would like to support what the police department is doing. Everything that I have seen and heard shows me that they are showing the best respect for all their equipment, that they are using them fairly and as needed. I certainly want them to have every piece of equipment available in an emergency situation. They have been several in the past with the Bearcat that was needed and other equipment. I've only ever heard two complaints, and one is regarding the flock cameras and other access to them and some of the reporting about drones. But I continue to brag about our great police department, and I totally support all their use of equipment that they have right now.

Thank you. Yes.

This is Raja Palela, 1216 West Hacienda Avenue. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the police department. About a year ago, there were multiple thefts in the neighborhood targeting Indians and Haitians. So I thank the police chief and the officers like we requested for like a community meeting. They came to the community center. Council member Sergio Lopez was there. The San Jose City Council member was there. They give a great presentation on how to secure the houses and things like that. So I would like to take this opportunity. And the case was, I believe, was solved. The perpetrators were caught and things like that. So I would like to take this opportunity to thank the police staff for attending to it in an urgency. Thank you.

Thank you. Do we have anyone online? No. Would anyone else like to speak on this matter? Okay, I'll close the public hearing and ask the council for comments and or a motion.

Yeah, I just want to, again, reiterate the comment of the residents that we've certainly seen some recent issues. The recent one on White Oaks, which was right around our houses that was effectively taken care of. So really want to emphasize support for the use of the equipment.

I see no other comments. Would you like to make the motion to adopt the resolution?

Yeah, let me just clarify. So it's government code 7709? 770. 770. 770. Okay.

All right. Okay. Yeah.

Yeah, I just wanted to make sure I had the, so the recommended action is the City Council adopt a resolution that each type of equipment identified in the 2025 Military Equipment Annual Report be complied with the standards set forth in Ordinance 2280 and introduce an ordinance first reading renewing the ordinance of Campbell Ordinance 2280 per requirements set forth in California Government Code 7070. I'll second.

We have a motion and a second to accept the resolution. Roll call, please.

Council Member Lopez.

Aye.

Council Member Hines.

Aye.

Vice Mayor Bybee. Aye. Mayor Furtado.

Aye. I would like to now ask the clerk to read the title of the ordinance.

An ordinance of the City Council of the... of the Campbell Renewing the Military Equipment Policy set forth by Chapter 8.44 of the Campbell Municipal Code as adopted by Campbell Ordinance 2280.

Thank you. I will actually move that the further reading be waived.

I'll second.

Motion and second to waive further reading. Roll call, please.

Council Member Lopez. Aye. Council Member Hines.

Aye.

Vice Mayor Bybee. Aye. Mayor Furtado.

Aye. Thank you. That concludes this item. We have no new business, and now we move to unfinished business. This is item number 10. So item 10.1 is a review of the draft climate action plan and the direction on final revisions of the plan. So the presentation will be given by our environmental program specialist, Tiffany Hussey.

Good evening, Mayor, City Council members. We're excited to provide an update on the draft of the Climate Action Plan tonight. So our purpose here tonight is to share the draft with you all, provide a little bit of an overview of the planning process we've been working on for the last two years, and also share feedback that we received during the six-week public comment period earlier this year. So tonight, staff is seeking council's direction on the level of ambition in the plan, any changes to the measures or actions that are in this draft plan, and any guidance on implementation reporting. So some background, our general plan calls for the preparation of a climate action plan that aligns with state emissions reduction targets. And in February of 2024, the city council approved a contract with Rincon Consultants. We've got Ryan Gardner here tonight. He's been working on this project with us. to also help answer any questions that you might have on the draft plan. But their contract was to support an existing conditions analysis, looking at all the plans, policies we already have, any programs we're working on that work towards environmental benefits or sustainability, to do a community greenhouse gas inventory and municipal operations inventory, looking at what our emissions look like in the year 2022 as a snapshot. To do an assessment of climate vulnerabilities, what changes to the climate we're most vulnerable to here in Campbell, and also looking at where our most vulnerable communities are in the city. And then to do an emissions forecast through 2045 so that we can come up with strategies and actions to help reach those state targets. So again, as an overview, we did this greenhouse gas analysis, climate adaptation analysis, developed these measures and actions, and now are at the point with a draft cap, hoping to work towards a final version of the cap to be adopted. And throughout this process, we've been doing extensive community outreach and engagement through events, our advisory committee, and public hearings. So just to talk a little bit more about what that stakeholder engagement has looked like. Again, we set up a community advisory committee at the start of this planning process, which we met with through key points throughout the planning process. We've had four phases of community outreach. So one in sort of the summer of 2024, helping us to identify those existing conditions and where sentiments lie in the community today. In October through November of 2024, we worked with the community and CBO partners to really help solve the vision of what this plan hopes to achieve. In March of 2025, we did another round of community outreach to help prioritize actions and consider which strategies our plan should include. And then December through January was when we had this draft plan available for public comment. Additionally, we have an internal working group that we set up with folks from different departments and divisions within the city, reviewing documents at different points, providing input, making sure that this plan really does include staff input and works for our city. And we had four city council meetings so far. So one to kick off the plan, introduce our consulting team, talk about the work plan and major milestones. And then again, to review our emissions inventory and our climate vulnerability assessment and outreach efforts. And then in March of last year to discuss scenarios, measures and actions. And at that time, council provided direction to be a little bit more conservative with our approach overall and focus more on voluntary actions like education and incentives rather than regulations and mandates. So the purpose of this plan is really to be a strategic roadmap that helps us have a path forward to increasing our emissions and help build resiliency to the changes that come with a changing climate. So this plan integrates mitigation and adaptation through a system-based framework. So it provides a long-term vision for climate action in Campbell. It includes emission reduction targets that are aligned with state goals, provides a comprehensive set of measures and actions across four systems, and an implementation framework that really emphasizes flexibility and feasibility. This is a guiding document. Nothing in this plan is binding. It does not determine which initiatives will necessarily be implemented when or where that funding will come from. That's really to be decided on an annual basis as part of our city's budgeting and work and development process. This is, again, really just a roadmap of if we did all of these things on this timeline, we would reach the state's targets. But knowing that there are a lot of competing priorities in the city and wanting to be sensitive to that. So just to recap, as part of this process, we did what we call a business as usual forecast. So based on what emissions looked like in 2022, as Campbell grows, we add more housing, we add more jobs. How would emissions change? We adjusted that because there is a lot of legislation at the state level that does help us reduce our emissions as a city. So that lighter blue line is adjusted. So even as the population grows, our emissions in 2045, if we did nothing else but followed state law, would be about the same as they were in 2022. And this green line here is the emissions reduction pathway that we would need to achieve in order to hit those statewide targets. So that gap for 2030 is about 54,000 metric tons of CO2e, and for 2045 is over 200 metric tons of carbon equivalent. So again, with this plan, we really took a system-based approach rather than saying, these are all of the actions that are about mitigation or reducing emissions, and these are all the actions for adaptation and resiliency. We really looked at it sort of holistically with these systems. So looking at our transportation system, Our building system, our urban ecosystems and sustainable food and what we call social governance, our social and governance systems. So on the sides here, you see the sort of strategies that we took with each of these approaches. So things like reducing VMT and mode shift and electrification to reduce transportation emissions. Doing resiliency retrofits, increasing efficiency and electrification for our building systems. Within urban ecosystems, thinking about things like tree canopy, flood resilience, waste reduction in our food systems. And within social and governance systems, really thinking about building community capacity, focusing on equity and education and interagency coordination with our partners. So in the plan, you'll see measures. And when we say measures, what we mean by that are aspirational long range goals to reduce emissions or build resilience. These measures are really focused through 2045. The supporting actions under them are a little bit more shorter term. So the actions under each measure our phased approach between, we have three phases going through 2033. So those actions are specific policies or programs that the city could pursue that would help reach those long range goals and our implementation considerations. So looking at what would be the impact if we were to implement a specific action, what would be the emissions reduction associated with that? Who from the city would be leading that effort? and what partnerships would be needed and what timeline that might happen by. As requested, we also included a consumption-based inventory. So this is separate from the community inventory that we did. It takes a different approach because it considers goods and services that are consumed within Campbell but have source emissions elsewhere. So products, goods that are imported, those emissions are captured in our community inventory. But we did do a separate analysis looking at consumption-based products. So we wouldn't add those numbers together with the community inventory. That would be double counting. But it's just a different lens to look at emissions. And we built these personal roadmaps with actions for individuals for things that they could do to reduce their own personal carbon footprint. Things like eating sustainably and reducing their waste, electrifying their home are incentives available to help support that, staying cool during warm weather, and things like switching to an EV. So it's a sort of checklist, if you will, of things that residents could consider to do. So we released the draft plan in December. It was open all through January and we received public comment on the draft. And tonight I'll be providing a quick summary of what those comments were. Those emails were also attached to the staff report, but we summarize it under the following categories. So comments that focused on implementation of the cap and then by each of the systems, the building system, transportation, urban ecosystem, and social governance system. So under implementation, we received support for the overall vision of the CAP and for implementing this plan. We did get recommendations to include regular updates and progress tracking for the CAP. We did get requests to be more ambitious in our greenhouse gas reduction targets. And there were some concerns about the affordability of building and vehicle electrification without financial assistance or subsidies. Under our building system comments, we received support for actions that reduce overall energy demand in addition to building electrification. We were asked to encourage smaller, more resource efficient homes and significant onsite solar generation as part of new housing development and encouragement to explore passive cooling strategies for refrigeration systems, server rooms, and other energy intensive facilities. For our transportation system, there was an emphasis on the importance of being able to bike safely throughout the city, including protected bike lanes, safe crossings, connections to transit, all things that we are working on with the multimodal transportation plan. And under urban ecosystems, we got a request to discourage the use of artificial turf due to environmental and health concerns and prohibit single use plastics. Our climate action plan does not touch on this. It focuses on emissions, understanding that artificial turf and single use plastics are an environmental concern. but there were emissions reductions associated with that. We did get support for circular economy strategies, helping reduce consumption of animal products through city procurement policies and eliminating food waste. We received comments encouraging for a more ambitious tree canopy coverage goal and support for planning only native or edible food producing plants that support biodiversity, protecting repairing corridors and addressing light pollution. And then under our social and governance system, there was a request to expand city communications and emergency messaging to include other languages besides just English and Spanish, and then encouragement for a fundamental shift in culture and behavior towards a holistic approach to sustainability. So we're here tonight seeking direction if there are any changes that we should make to the draft plan that you've seen before bringing back a final version for adoption. So again, I set up those three questions at the start. So the first is the level of ambition. So again, last spring when we came to you, you know, we seek direction on our draft measures and actions. And we were directed to take a more conservative approach and really focus on supportive actions rather than mandates. We're still trying to align with state targets. So you'll see that we made changes to those draft measures and actions we brought forward last year. We really focused on education and incentives, especially around building electrification rather than reach codes and pushing mandates and work firing electrification, really helping residents if they want to electrify to take those voluntary measures. We removed the more ambitious actions and we modified language in the cap to really emphasize that this is an aspirational roadmap. We know that the state targets are just around the corner for 2030. That's a very short timeline. So again, this is a really aspirational plan, but the language and the cap is not binding. It's just if we implement these things on this timeline, we would reach these targets. And a lot of cities have taken this approach of we know that this is hard work. We know that it requires a lot of resources. It can be expensive. It can be challenging. But by having this plan in place, it does give us a roadmap of things to pursue and does make us more competitive for grants. funding to try to fund some of these things outside of using city general funds and the actions again in the cab are not binding any policy or program in here is considered potential future work plan items so we would bring those items back to city council for discussion or do additional community outreach on that specific program or policy before implementing anything in this plan So the second question to council tonight is, do we want to make any changes to the measures or actions? This draft has been refined based on staff feedback. It represents a less stringent implementation timeline based on the availability of staff resources and financial resources. In the near term, we did get public comment asking us to go further. So it's just a question to council of whether or not we want to make more changes to this plan. And based on consideration of this feedback, you know, if you want us to make further changes to the plan, we would do that before bringing a final plan to you for adoption later this year. And then when it comes to implementation reporting, it's staff's recommendation to regularly update the inventory and report out progress to the council. Given the resources required to conduct an inventory, we recommend doing this maybe every two to three years rather than annually. There's a lag time in getting the data, and it is a heavy lift to do that analysis, and emissions don't generally change a lot year to year. So we are thinking about, you know, maybe again, a two to three year timeline that allows us to regularly consider where our missions are, make changes to the plan, provide updates without doing that every single year or waiting too many years to provide an update. So we're also seeking direction from council tonight at what cadence you would like to receive updates. And we would add that into the final plan prior to adoption. So your feedback tonight will be integrated into this draft plan, and we would return with a cap for formal adoption, hopefully at a meeting soon in the future. So that's our presentation for you tonight.

Thank you, Tiffany. That's a nice summary. So first I'll ask members of the council if there are questions they'd like to ask. Vice Mayor Biden.

Good presentation, Tiffany. Thank you. So I understand that it's a guiding document. But a lot of members of the public don't understand that and see this and read it and think, oh my gosh, what's happening? And as you probably know, we've received an overwhelming amount of emails on this topic. At last count, I had gotten 60, which is a lot to sort through. And two of the messages that struck me from the content of the emails was a question about this overwhelming support for electrification. The question was, what's the overwhelming support? Is there a way that you can quantify that from the public outreach that was done? How many people supported electrification, as opposed to the 60 that we've received that don't want this?

Absolutely. So as I mentioned, we've done a lot of community outreach through this process. So that first phase was a survey where we got close to I think 500 responses. In that third phase, we did another survey and received, I want to say close to the same number of responses. several hundred responses. And to be clear, the support was around these sort of voluntary measures of providing education, providing incentives. We did hear a lot of support from the community on making these things easier, helping people along, not regulating them and forcing them to electrify their homes. So when you see, I think the concern has been around BLD3, and saying by 2045, we hope to achieve 100% electrification. Again, the actions in this plan really just go to 2033, not all the way to 2045. There's a lot that can change in terms of state building codes, in terms of technology, things going in that direction. A lot can change between now and 2045. That is just the aspirational goal, and that aligns with statewide targets. The state has said we want to be carbon neutral by 2045. which means any emissions that we do have that we don't get rid of, we offset with like carbon capture. So we're not mandating 100% electrification. I want to be very clear in that that is not a mandate in the plan. There's not an action calling for that. The actions in the plan are really focused on streamlining permitting, making it easier for folks, providing education and helping educate them on existing incentives that they can voluntarily choose to electrify their homes. And that's a separate conversation. And the air district rules that I know are forcing some of that retrofitting.

And the second question then is related to the air quality district. And so what are the consequences or penalties to the city if the city doesn't support the regulations of the air quality control?

Do you want to speak? I know you've been working a lot on the air district.

Good evening. I'm Ryan Gardner with Rintown Consultants. The Air District rules are going to apply throughout all nine counties of the Bay Area, and it will not be up to individual jurisdictions to adopt that. So that will just be the new law of the land for those areas within Bay Area Air District territory.

But that is an answer. Are there penalties associated with that? From my understanding, what I heard from a couple people is that in Southern California cities have... rejected this electrification regulation that's gonna be imposed?

Southern California, they do not have a regulation that requires this currently. In Southern California, or I forgot the South Coast Air Quality Management District, they did move forward with a like a sales based approach where they have like a certain number of units that need to be sold, but it's I don't believe they're implementing that and it. The air district rule is a time of sale. So essentially be will not be able to buy that equipment. They are looking at potentially some exemptions for really challenging use cases. So a lot of this work is quite feasible. There are situations where you need like a service upgrade or you have not been to wiring or some some circumstance, which we're looking at maybe like 4% or 5% when you'd need a panel upgrade, exemptions for that. But by and large, that will be just the requirement. And it'll start with water heaters first, and then move to HVAC systems under a certain BTU in 2029. That still needs to be adopted by their board. They're still off-ramps for that, and they're still working through exactly what that's going to look like.

Thank you.

Well, while you're there, I just kind of a follow up question that the Vice Mayor had. The jurisdiction of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, does that parallel the jurisdiction of ABAC as well as MTC, which includes the nine counties that surround San Francisco Bay and the 101 cities within the nine counties?

I don't know exactly what the overlap is between ABAC and Bay Area Air District and MTC.

Well, I'm just saying ABAC and MTC, their area of jurisdiction happens to be what I described and you had sort of mentioned that I wanted to make sure of the the geographic jurisdiction of Bumqua, which is different than the Southern California area. So Bumqua unfortunately or fortunately affects us as one of the cities. And I just wanted to know if you knew what the depth of the jurisdiction was.

Oh, like how far their boundary actually is or what they're able to regulate?

No, no, what their boundaries are.

It's San Francisco, Santa Clara, San Mateo, Alameda, Sonoma, Napa, and Solano.

That's very good. I mean, I know I didn't know that, but that does parallel the nine counties that surround the Bay. So it sounds like it is within the same jurisdiction. Yeah. Okay, I didn't mean to put you on the spot. But you did a great job. Thank you. Other questions? Other counsel? Just questions right now?

No.

Um, Tiffany, thank you. We may call you back. But okay. So I will open the public hearing on this matter. And before I do so, I just want to kind of make sure and sort of set the stage. First of all, members of the public are invited to speak, and you're invited to say whatever you plan to say, whatever you want to say. I just want to, as the vice mayor alluded to, there has been a lot of misunderstanding in terms of what this council is going to do or plans to do. several of the messages we received uh indicated that the council would be voting tonight to mandate um all electrification of all the houses in the city um i'm sorry that's not true we uh going back to the instructions that we had provided during one of our preliminary hearings in march of 2025 at that time we advised the staff and it was alluded to it in Ms. Hudson's report, that we wanted to take a more conservative approach, which meant we did not want to start creating rules and regulations and mandating. We wanted to simply promote education and encouragement, and there may be other monetary incentives that would be available that might convince some people to do that, but that's all a part of education. So we don't intend to do that. We're not voting on anything tonight. We're simply providing as individual members of the council comments back to the staff so that they can prepare the final I will say, however, that any mandating is coming from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. And so you heard their jurisdiction, which is different from the similar situation down in Southern California and the Los Angeles area and San Diego and so on. The current rules are that by January of 2027, they are mandating that if you want to replace your water heater, it has to be an electric water heater. That's not coming from us, it's coming from them. They also have intentions that by 2027 to replace your furnace, if it's a gas furnace, you must replace it with an electric furnace. And the intent is also that by 2029, if you have a water tank, the actual tank that holds the water, that is not powered by gas, but powered by electricity, you have to switch that out to a tankless electric operation.

So... Quick clarification.

I'm sorry, yeah.

So the 2027 is for water heaters. The 2029 is for HVAC. And then 2031 would be if you have a large water heater, either for like a commercial property that's very large or a tankless. It's based on the BTUs per hour. So tankless have a higher BTU per hour than your tankless if you want to replace that. After 2031, you would need to switch to electric at that time.

And it's just another nuance here. It's not electric. It's zero nitric oxide emissions. And it happens to be that electric is. So the Air District has been setting nitric oxide thresholds for 40 years, and they've been coming down steadily. they're very low right now and they're just moving to zero. And that is going to knock out gas appliances unless there's some new technology that comes out that makes them zero-knots, which they currently are not.

So for all practical purposes, it means electric, I mean, in terms of our interpretation today. Well, thanks for that clarification. So I point all out because Those regulations that may be coming, again, are not coming from us. If you want to replace any of the items that I mentioned or that was mentioned by the staff up until those deadlines, you can do so with gas if that's what you have and that's what you want to do prior to the deadline. So I'm not encouraging that, but I'm saying it's permitted under the law. So with all of those caveats, I will now open the public hearing, invite members of the public to comment. And I do have some cards here. Again, I request you fill out a card. You're not required to do so. Okay. And then we'll take comments of persons online. So first of all, you have two minutes to speak. I'll call on Antonio Montoya.

Mayor, council members, thanks for seeing me today. Thank you for the clarification, Mayor, a little bit more on things. I know there's been some miscommunication, I think, with a lot of the stuff going on. I'm here locally, 163 Carlin Avenue. And, you know, I have some concerns with Some of the homes have been around for a long time. People have been here for a long time. There is a worry about the financial impact of what it is going to take to change some things. If we got to a spot where we had to change all of our heating elements, those of us that have gas, it would require things like panel changes and things for electrical equipment. These things put a pretty high pressure on people. I know right now, I think some of us are in a little bit of a economical situation where some of us are a little, it's a little more difficult for us. So I do worry about the community of the people around and what they can handle. I'm a general contractor, my trade. So I have worked on a lot of the houses in my area. So I do know my specific area very well and what houses have what. So I see this as being an issue. I know that we have to adapt with state regulations and things, but what are we doing as far as financial situations to help those that might have a problem that may lose their house because they cannot afford to get a permit for this? Let's say we need a new water heater and we can't afford some of these changes and are we gonna be condemned or kicked out of the house because we can't do these things. So I have a concern there. I had also seen that there were some notes, notations on, there was a high community support for the climate action change and things. I had little time today to run around and talk to some people. And I will tell you that in the small amount of time, do I have just a second? Nope. I have got a signature of everyone in my area showing that they are not really in favor of this. So the high support I have an issue where that comes from when I'm seeing otherwise in my neighborhood. So thank you.

Thank you. Helen Skinner.

Hi, Mayor, hi, council members. I've been a resident of Campbell for nearly eight years now, and I'm really proud of this city and its businesses and its services. I'm very supportive of the cap. In particular, I'm supportive of the consumption-based emissions inventory, which helps residents like me better understand our own contributions to the emissions and what we can do to reduce them. I appreciate that this is a guidance document and I appreciate the educational emphasis and the recommendations of actions that individuals can take on their own. I support this very much and I hope this continues. Thank you.

Thank you.

Honorable Mayor and City Council members, thank you very much for hearing us out. And thank you for the clarification. There definitely has been some apparently miscommunication, things, written words didn't come across as they should be. I understand you folks are city of Campbell and a lot of these things are not coming from from you folks, but let's just say you are a lot closer to the government entities than I am. So I just wanted to mention as you are, and I'm sure you have considered all of these things about the financial impact on people as resident here just with a contractor understands that upgrades to electrical panels and even worse than that, the inside wiring of a lot of homes that cannot carry a load would, in fact, if they tried to do it, it would be very dangerous. So there is that aspect of it, just financial hardship on people. And on top of that, even the bigger issue that I struggle with, every year, just about every year, I've been living in Campbell. I bought my home in 1999, so 27 years. Love this city, by the way, and kudos to you folks for your efforts to make the city livable, safe, and what have you. All of our residents, we all appreciate that. But every year, just about every year since I'd say 10 or 12 years ago, we have experienced power cuts outages, enforced blackouts, brownouts, This is with the current situation that we have right now. What's going to happen when more and more people are buying electric vehicles? Was it just a few years ago when we were told not to... Sorry, just a couple more seconds and I'll be off. We were told not to charge electric vehicles because of the power, the demand was just too much. So just keep that in mind that... the supply, if we can hold off all these efforts until the supply can be met, then that would actually put us more at ease. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Hello, Shawn Mendelson, 140 Virginia, Campbell. Hello, Campbell City Council. I believe that CAP is a moral obligation to the next generation to be implemented, and we have the solutions in this CAAP. I'm a Campbell resident, the father of two teenagers, the person who first brought this issue of the CAP to the council in 2021. a member of the Community Advisory Committee for the CAP and a proud advisor to the Campbell chapter of Silicon Valley Youth Climate Action, these four young ladies over here from SVYCA. I'm extremely thankful for Tiffany Hudson, who I don't know, right here, Tiffany Hudson and Ryan for all the work they've done over these last few years dedicated to the CAP and they've done everything Especially Tiffany, she has done everything she can to shape the spirit of this community. I also want to recognize Council Member Lopez for his commitment to a strong cap. As much as I like our city drafting any cap at this point, since we're the only one that doesn't have one, since they started asking for one five years ago, the state of things has changed. We aren't cutting enough carbon emissions, in fact. With this draft of the cap, we must make carbon reduction goals higher than the state. We can't afford to be, as you said, conservative. We have to be a beacon of hope, a symbol of what community can accomplish. We have to be bold. We want other like-minded communities to see our community and follow suit. I don't believe the whole state of California will meet those carbon reduction goals as you mentioned in Southern California, let alone the world's community. So we have to compensate, we need to do better. I brought this up in 2021, I'm going to make this simple. We're the same size as Menlo Park, I feel our community is similar to theirs. In their two-year-old updated cap, they have a key similar strategies, including transitioning existing buildings to all electric and being more efficient. But the glaring difference is the Menlo Park cap strategy is to be carbon neutral within the next four years by 2030. Additionally, we need to change reach codes in Campbell from AC to heat pumps. I'm representing SVYCA. I'm not here for me. I'm here for future generations. By addressing the fiscal responsibility of carbon neutrality now, we're getting ahead of the larger fiscal problems. Thank you. And look at your children, grandchildren, your community, and hopefully you'll be able to explain the choices to the next generation and make this a turning point in history. Really think about the future, not just yourself. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Molly?

Thank you council members for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Molly and I live on 3702 Moorpark Avenue. I'm a 10th grader at Prospect High School in the Campbell's Union High School District. We are part of the Silicon Valley Youth Climate Action Organization, and we are here to support the climate action and adaption plan. With the recent regression of climate policies at the federal level, we need to take action now at the local level more than ever. We don't need to look far into the future to see the impacts of a changing climate. From the wildfires in LA not long ago to the heat waves over 90 degrees, the evidence is right at our doorsteps. This is not just an environmental issue. It's also a matter of public health and the economy as a whole. The cost of inaction is already being paid in rising utility costs and compromised community health. But today we have a choice. The CAP gives us an incredible opportunity to change this status quo. It makes the city's infrastructure more resilient and sets limits on how much the city contributes to climate change. affecting many people's lives and giving people like us hope for the future. Thank you to all the staff for putting together this action plan. It is truly great work. While having greenhouse gas reduction goals is a great first step, we need to set targets that go beyond the state targets. The state's greenhouse gas reduction targets must be our floor, not our ceiling. Dear city council members, I urge you to be more ambitious in your goals actions and directives to staff regarding climate action. Please prioritize environmental policies. They are necessary for success in combating climate change. By setting a higher bar, we signal that our city is a leader in green innovation. This attracts future industries and creates resilient jobs. Please, I urge you to adopt a plan that exceeds state targets and lead with the boldness this crisis demands. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Mira.

Hello, city council members. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Miroslava Polivinko and my address is 1037 Zarek Drive. I'm also a junior at Prospect High School in the in the Campbell Union High School District. I represent SVICA, and I am in support of the CAP plan. When I was younger, I remember sitting on my couch and watching a news broadcast. In this broadcast, the reporter warned that the Earth might become uninhabitable in 10 years. At the time, this really scared me, and honestly, it still does. I recognize the effects of climate change in all the years after hearing this, since it has seeped into every area of my life, and there are very little people that can say that it hasn't. In middle school, my friend with asthma couldn't come to school when the air was smoky due to forest fires. And even when there weren't any fires, every single one of us breathes in air every day, air that is getting more and more polluted. I noticed that the rivers in my local park that I would go to as a kid were drying up. My sister never got to experience the rivers in that park or have the childhood memories of jumping over the running water underneath her. It is getting worse, which is why we need to change something before the prophecy that I heard all those years ago comes true. Adopting the cap is a step towards bolder change and it affects everyone. Please, I urge you to adopt the cap for a better future. for a future. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Aisha?

Hello, Council. Thank you for giving me the chance to speak to you about the count. My name is Aisha Kamath, and I live on 1076 Polk Lane, and I'm a ninth grader at Prospect in the Campbell Union High School District. I've lived here for over a decade, and I'm sure we can all agree that it's a wonderful place to live. However, we are not ready at all for what is coming. As a child, I was made aware of climate change, but because I never experienced it firsthand, I didn't realize how severe it was. That wasn't until two years ago. With longer, hotter summers and heat waves starting in March, small tasks such as doing my homework or getting chores done was very difficult. My migraines, which are triggered by heat, made me miss school because I couldn't keep my head up, let alone learn. And this will just be the beginning if we don't act now. This is why we need the cap. It doesn't just say that climate change is an issue. It provides real local solutions. This policy partners with Silicon Valley Clean Energy to expand electrification and make clean energy more accessible through rebates. It also promotes a transition to green vehicles, not without taxing them, making sure it doesn't come at the cost of our roads. By passing the cap, you are making sure that students like me will not lose opportunities just because of the environment we inherited. Thank you.

Thank you. Kaylee Hobbs.

Hello, city council members. My name is Kaylee Hobbs. I live at 3187 Chivas Place, and I'm a sophomore at Prospect High School in the Campbell Union High School District. I'm very grateful for the opportunity to speak about the cap to you today. I used to experience climate anxiety and was very fearful of climate change and its harmful effects. As I got older, I have realized that making an impact on climate change awareness and legislation has helped me cope with this. I think the CAP is a great document that is easy to understand and puts Campbell on the right track towards being the environmentally friendly community we can all be proud of. However, it could be made even better if it incorporates some small changes we at Silicon Valley Youth Climate Action have suggested. First off, the cap will only work if it is followed. I'm worried about the cap may not be followed because it currently lacks plans for frequent status checks on progress. So the city won't know if it has fallen behind on its goals till it's too late. Therefore, we ask that progress checks are every minimum of two years are added to the cap. next we would also like to reiterate the importance of reach codes requiring converting from ac to heat pumps although i know the city council had already voted against this i would implore you to revisit this ac to heat pump reach codes will help prepare households both logistically and financially for the air district zero knox appliance rules that are coming into effect in 2027 and 2029 And the added benefit is that it will speed up our reduction of emissions significantly. By adding progress checks every two years, the AC to heat pump reach codes, we as a city will reduce emissions now and hopefully lead to less children experiencing climate anxiety like I did. These small changes you can make to our city plans can greatly impact the lives of generations to come. Thank you very much for your time and attention.

Thank you. Enrique Navarro.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. I'm Enrique Navarro with the Santa Clara County Association of Realtors and with the Too Costly Bay Area Coalition of Taxpayer Advocates, Small Housing Providers, Business Groups, Neighborhood Residents, Realtors, and Property Management Professionals. The environmental goals are laudable. Everybody agrees with reducing waste to cleaner atmosphere, cleaner air, cleaner water. However, this report suggests that to impose an unfunded burdensome mandate on homeowners. I understand I heard the comments before. So I speak to oppose the inclusion of a costly residential electrification retrofit as proposed on page 46 of the report. This should be pursued through voluntary incentives, not as a mandate. Most Campbell homes, as you might be aware, were built in the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s. and are approaching their maximum electrical capacity, which will require an expensive conversion and associated home renovations, tens of thousands of dollars and more. Many of these homes are on the older side of the decades. The older homes have knob and tube wiring considerations that aren't fully appreciated. And oftentimes you'll hear from the barrier district side that the rebates are enough. However, the rebates, often cited as a reason why the cost concerns are invalid. It's not really so. The rebates are woefully insufficient to cover the cost of not just switching electric appliances, but also conducting the work necessary to accommodate those electric appliances. We'll hear about a grant for $2,000, $3,000, up to a certain amount. However, assuming you're first in line for all these grants, you can probably stack up 10 to 15,000 if you're lucky, most likely the money's gonna run out before most people get to that point and you can meet the condition of promising up to 3000 or a certain amount by simply offering yourself $300. You've met the up to condition, but it's a bit misleading to suggest that the money's necessarily gonna be there for everybody. And then also, as it was mentioned by a gentleman before that there was high community support for this. However, I fear that the outreach only captured those inclined to agree with the aggressive electrification and there should have been broader conversations with broader community members, including the groups listed as part of the two policy coalition. And I'll just finish really quickly. For these reasons, we're highly critical of the Bay Area Air District's attempts to push through its own set of regulations. And so we ask that you not encourage the pursuit of these retrofits as a mandate. Thank you.

Thank you. Scott Reese.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council. actually came tonight just to kind of listen. But I am one of the people last night who did send an email because I think there is a lot of misinformation. I'm actually kind of confused because if this is a mandate coming from the Bay Area Air Quality, what can you guys do about it? That's what I don't really understand. If it's already coming, what is it that you guys can work with? The other thing, I think everyone, yeah, who doesn't want better emissions and stuff like that? So I think the staff report is good, but I think when we get down to the nitty gritty in there of what's really gonna happen, I think that's where we need a lot more education on what is the true price of some of this stuff and what is it really that the city wants to implement? And I know it's about water heaters and it's about heating systems. let's maybe you guys can give a mandate to them. Like, let's find out what the real cost is on those because it's not just the replacement. It is the wiring. It is potentially panel upgrades. It's also transform upgrades. Our electrical system right now probably can't handle that. Someone's got to have to pay for that. I know PG&E is not going to do it. I would just hope that your direction that you give back to staff is let's find out really what the costs are. And if there is something we can do, let's talk about, let's have a bigger discussion. I know your hands are kind of tied. So I'm really, I'm actually confused why we're actually talking about this if it's already coming. Like if you guys don't have a say in it, could you explain to me what it is that you guys can do?

Thank you. Thank you.

All right.

First of all, I'll ask the city clerk, is anyone online? Okay, we have people online, so please go ahead.

Dashia Leeds, would you like to speak?

Hello, my name is Dashiell Leeds. I'm conservation coordinator for the Sierra Club Loma Prieta chapter. I know it's not the subject of discussion tonight, but regarding the Air District rules, it's worth mentioning that these rules have built in flexibility measures which exempt homes with difficult installation challenges and exempt low income residents. Health studies conducted by the Air District estimate that these rules, if implemented, would save $890 million in health impacts, prevent 85 premature deaths annually, and prevent 15,000 asthma attacks. This is because NOx is literally poison. There is no safe level of exposure to NOx. Regarding panel upgrades, the case study of whole home electrification in San Mateo County found that 95% of homes were able to undergo electrification retrofits on a 100 amp panel. Reach codes, by the way, are an excellent method for incentivizing electrification. So I implore you not to discard that tool in your toolbox. Now onto the cap. We support the comments and letter from Silicon Valley Youth Climate Action's Campbell team members. We support the request for a stronger greenhouse gas reduction target. The current provisional target of 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 is really not strong compared to other cities. And given that the target is provisional, we recommend establishing a more ambitious target. we also support increasing the strength of your urban tree canopy goal we're glad to see that urban ecology has been included in the plan we support its inclusion broadly including the mention of native plants and action items ue 1.1 and 1.4 native plants have an advantage over non-native plants because they provide better ecosystem services and are better for local biodiversity and we hope you add the prioritization of native plants to the other ue action items such as ue 2.2 which analyzes trees that have already been planted, and UE 2.3, which updates the official street tree list. We also hope you consider including exploring a dark sky ordinance as an action item, which saves energy and reduces nuisance light pollution. Regarding the cadence of reporting, we hope that you provide direction for annual reporting or sooner. More frequent updates allows the Council to make informed decisions during your priority setting meetings. Thank you.

Thank you.

Stephanie Morris, would you like to speak?

Yes, thank you. As a Campbell homeowner and a small business owner for over 23 years and as a parent, I'm heavily invested in Campbell's present and future. Thank you for the opportunity to comment online because I had a conflict with an event at my son's school tonight. I chose to participate in the Climate Action Community Advisory Committee to provide input during the process of developing Campbell's CAP. After having participated in the step-by-step two-year process to review and receive input from the Campbell community meetings, and after having researched climate action plans from other local cities, I believe that this plan brings the best of these items forward into Campbell, balancing the needs of everybody who was surveyed. I'm confident that Campbell's cap is balanced and reasonable. I also wanted to reiterate the fact that all the other cities around us do have climate action plans. So we are following what's already out there to large extent. Once again, to remind everybody that there is no mandate in this plan. There's a lot of incentives in it. I would like to urge the council not to weaken the current level of ambition and to also add for progress checks every three years. I also would like to support the inclusion of native plants in the climate action plan and especially the adjustment of the city tree list to include native plants in the tree list. I believe the cap is responsive to the needs of various income levels in our community, and it brings a really holistic viewpoint that includes boosting the quality of life as we also protect our air quality. That includes bicycle and pedestrian mobility and also habitat for our city. So I urge the council to move forward in supporting the plan, and thank you very much for your time tonight.

Thank you.

So we do have a couple more that registered to speak. Holly Spanower, would you like to speak?

Yes, thank you. Hi, everyone. Hello, council. My name is Holly Spainhower. I'm a senior policy specialist at Civic Plate, which is a project of Mercy for Animals, headquartered in and having many supporters in California, including Campbell. My comment tonight is very, very simple and short. I just want to thank the council for considering the cap and thank the phenomenal leaders who led the drafting of the plan. I think the CAP is an excellent, incredibly well thought out document, and it provides an exceptional opportunity to establish a strategic roadmap for Campbell's future. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Karen Black, would you like to speak? It's not unmuting. Okay, let's that's all I have. Is there anybody else that's currently online that would like to speak on this item?

Doesn't look like it.

Sorry, I missed the order there. I'm a landscape architect, I think you guys know, and I would like a definition of what you mean by native plants. Native to this soil right here, this dirt, the Campbell, you'd probably have grasslands, oak trees, and a riparian quarter. Native to the Sierra foothills, you have fire prone plants that catch on fire and the seeds don't even propagate without a fire. So I have a discussion with my clients all the time of what do you mean by native? And we need to be very careful because, like I said, some are flammable and in a fire prone plant community and native to where? Santa Clara County? Yes. The Santa Clara Valley Water District doves have a native plant list. They go around and collect the seed pods to keep the indigenous gene pool for repairing corridors. But other than that, Campbell was probably grasslands. And I don't know that you want that to be all our ornamental plants. So please define what you mean by native.

Thank you.

Yes. Raja Pallula, 1216 West House Avenue, Campbell. Firstly, my appreciation for staff on all the efforts in preparing the report. I'm in favor of reducing carbon footprint, all in for electrification of new homes, major remodels. I'm super supportive of the required education. I also want a more practical approach, and I don't want this to end up being one of the vacancy lot kind of thing where we pass something and then suddenly everybody realizes the cost of it, and then suddenly we have the whole council all full of it. Some things I want to highlight, I did not see quantification on breakdown of how many Campbell residents homeowners have provided feedback. I did not see an analysis on the ratio of residents of Campbell versus non-residents in the feedback format. Cost impact, I did not see any quantification or data or study showing categorization of the ages of home in Campbell. Based on the cost impact study for different aged homes, a mathematical modeling on physical impact for the homeowners, of all the upgrades. So mandatoring versus volunteering, mandatoring electrification on homes, on replacement on broken appliances will force a lot of homeowners into debt. So PG&E panel upgrades are so backed up that people end up living without heat and laundry if we have to keep waiting for a broken appliance to be fixed. And all of this needs to be upgraded. No district or authority is about people's mandate based on my reading of recent news, the Southern California news and the research I have done. There is going to be a ballot measure to reverse, at least as far as I know, there is going to be a ballot measure to reverse the disastrous regulation that's coming in, making everybody force up. I'm all in for new construction. When somebody is doing a remodel, everybody knows what they are signing up for. But if my laundry broke, or my AC broke, or my water broke, I want to spend $5,000 to replace probably the appliance, not like $30,000 to retrofit the whole home wiring. Request to the city council. If you have to go through this, I encourage the city to declare a sales tax holiday on all electrical appliances for the homes. And I also request the city council how you participate in region wide councils. I want you all to take the opinion of the residents to this air quality district. Thank you.

Thank you. Would anyone else like to speak? Yes.

Thank you. I just have questions. You said you're not voting on this tonight. How will we know when you're going to vote on it, what you will have decided, and how can we possibly influence your decisions? That was my first question. My second question is from powers that be. I've looked at different statistics and it says to generate electricity, it takes coal and natural gas, that's the one way, turbines, which are, you know, if the wind's not blowing, we don't have turbines. And I was just wondering, has anybody done a study as to the offset between creating electricity and transport, storing it, transporting it, via coal and natural gas as opposed to what it costs and the emissions from household use that only may be using their gas stove once a week. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak?

since I'm here.

My name is Paul, I live in 74 Carlin.

I came down here because I saw an email that there was a move afoot to mandate retrofitting of gas for electric. And I wanted to just register and that we had overwhelming community support for this idea. And I just want to say that I'm not part of the overwhelming support. I don't want any retrofitting mandated. I don't want to rip out my working appliances to retrofit to electric. That is a very bad idea for the climate, for anything you can think of. Tearing out something that works, put in something you don't even know whether it's going to work or not, or you don't have any experience with it. is a really bad idea. This should be done in a completely voluntary manner and encouraged. There should be no mandates. And we shouldn't be trying to sneak this in to mandate carbon reductions through NOx.

That is a very bad idea. I'd like to make a comment that I iterated before that the decisions that are being made here are at the council level. I'm just saying so. Address that to the council, please.

I'm addressing this particular guy right here.

Address it to the council.

It's a bad idea. I'm going to address council now. I'm going to address the council now. It's a bad idea to force us to force carbon reductions through NOx reductions. That's a bad idea.

Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak? Okay, I will close the public hearing. First of all, thank all members of the public who did choose to speak tonight. Appreciate your comments. Now, I will bring this matter back to the council. It's the intent of the council to simply as individual members of the council to provide comments and advice to members of the staff. We are not going to vote on this measure or take majority votes or anything of that nature. We had no intention of doing that. Eventually, when the staff finishes their report and brings it back to us, the Climate Action Plan for adoption, that will be noticed in the public record as we're required to do. So the city clerk's office is responsible for noticing that and publishing the agenda. I can't tell you exactly when it is, but the information will be noticed and meet all of the legal obligations. Hopefully, we will give wide notice so that people are aware of what action we intend to take. Once again, it's the policy of the city council not to mandate or require anything. It is the intent of this council, as we said before, to provide education and incentives. And some of my colleagues may have additional comments on things that we might do. So with that, I'll ask members of the council to comment. So, Council Member.

Lucas. Well, before I make my comments, I'm going to have to clarify one thing, which we heard and was in some of the emails. And I, of course, reviewed the cap and the report, the reference to retrofitting in there. Could you clarify and how you would characterize that given the What we've heard and what I understand to be the case that the mayor said, as well as the previous decision that the council made where there was a vote, I believe in terms of the direction, which was to not pursue mandates and to focus more on incentives. So could you talk about that language within that?

Absolutely. So what folks are referring to is measure BLD 3, which has retrofit existing residential buildings to reduce natural gas usage by 18% and non-residential buildings to reduce natural gas usage by 15% by 2030. And then again, because this is a long-range aspirational goal, the actions in the plan do not get us to 2045. But that second part of BLD 3 is that we will retrofit all existing buildings to be zero carbon and resilient to extreme heat and poor air quality by 2045. Again, that's aspirational when we look at the measures, or sorry, the actions under each measure. We have things like conduct a high-level analysis for city-owned and private properties, figuring out what buildings emit the most, or things like streamlining permitting. We have an action under here to collaborate with SVCE, who does provide clean energy, does not use coal. that we would collaborate with them to help residents participate in programs, provide more education on their programs. They have a Go Electric advisor that will hold your hand through the entire process if you need that level of support, or just will answer your questions about any of their rebates or retrofitting. We have actions that speak to partnering with community-based organizations for education outreach. There is, again, nothing in here that is mandating anyone to do any sort of retrofitting. The actions in this plan supporting that measure are really about voluntary measures, helping people make those changes if they choose. and supporting these air district rules that are coming that we don't necessarily have control over, but helping people if they are going to replace equipment, not just because, but at time of failure, at time of regular replacement, when they make those replacements, making sure that they know what incentives are available and that they have technical assistance and support to help them make those changes.

Thank you. That's very helpful. And that'll lead into my overall comments and feedback with this. One, I do think just as a point, given some of the misinformation and concerns, I think it would be reasonable to clarify the intent and the language there before it comes back for final adoption, just to capture exactly what you just said and what the intent is, that it's to support people who want to voluntarily uh, make those choices and, and that, that it's not, I just think that would be helpful. It doesn't change anything that's in there. It just clarifies it for anyone reading this because it is intended to be a public, um, uh, document. Um, I, I, I think I, I largely agree with almost, uh, everything you heard, the ideas and suggestions, um, from, from the members of the public, um, who spoke today, things like focusing on looking at the tree canopy, the definition of what are native plants, native wildflowers, that kind of thing. If we can look at some of those small details before it comes back for final adoption, I think that would help strengthen the document. Also, I particularly want to thank the students who came out and spoke and spoke from your heart about the impact of this and why this is personal, because you will be living with ramifications of these decisions. And I want you to feel that you're invested in that you have a stake and that you have a voice in helping shape this process. A number of students and other commenters spoke to saying that can we look at checking in every two years, every three years? I don't think it's explicit, but the way I read this is because we would be looking at the work plans on an annual basis. I think really that provides an annual check-in where staff will be looking at this document and seeing what aligns and so might be worth pulling out some of that language and clarifying that. Could be that, you know, maybe every two years there's a more comprehensive look, but the way I read the existing document, I just want to make sure that this aligns with your understanding and that's clear to the members of the public, if it is accurate, that we have an annual checkpoint as well, really, the way this is designed. So me pulling out and clarifying that language as well. And then finally, with the concerns that we've heard, I guess my overall point and my biggest point of feedback as I've reflected on this process, and have followed it closely, both from the Air District debates and just some of the concerns, the back and forth of that. I've spent time on my own just studying and looking at what local cities across the Bay Area are doing. And so my biggest point of feedback is that both as we consider finalizing the document, but also as we come back in future years and use this to guide us. I really want us to just put our money where our mouth is. I think it's time for that. And to think about something I think is in line with the document, the previous direction from council, but to put in our own funding to encourage the voluntary adoption, to really truly cover the cost of these kind of upgrades. And initially, before I really started looking at the numbers, my concern, of course, is I think it has been with some of my colleagues in the past, which I shared, is the cost and not wanting to have something that's just open-ended and incurring these kind of liabilities and costs to the council. The most successful local program that I have looked at, actually, I would argue throughout the Bay Area, not too far from us, is in the city of Palo Alto. And what they actually looked, when they're looking, again, on a purely voluntary basis, looking at encouraging retrofits and electrification, switching up the technologies, a lot of things they've been talking about. At a certain point, they started out with different pilot programs, and at a certain point they said, wait a minute, we can actually calculate out, if you look at all the inventory in the city, assume that every year there's gonna be some amount of it that gets swapped out. That's actually a cost that we can estimate, we can take the average of that and figure out how to put city resources to fully cover the cost of that. And what they actually ended up finding that in Palo Alto is I would say comparable size to us. I think it's about 65,000 people. So larger than Campbell, but it's not say San Jose with a million people and vastly different order back to budget. They found that that was actually a cost that they can manage was very reasonable within the city budget assuming that the maximum number of people who could potentially conceivably in a year um swap out this technology could do it that they could actually fully cover the cost so i would like us to explore um in in full and in part um some kind of version um of that because you know again i started out thinking well if this is something open-ended that's just not fiscally responsible within our resources but if cities that I view as being comparable to us in terms of residents and issues that they face. And Palo Alto certainly has a larger budget and more staff. But if they've figured out the cost and figured out a way to do this, let's just say, just fully cover it. I think that is something worth looking at because we're going to keep running the same debates and having the same very valid concerns from residents when perhaps there isn't a need to. And between the city and SVCE and other incentives, it seems like it would be possible to just fully cover the cost. Again, voluntary for those who want to, but I think that's actually a way to encourage, and as we're seeing the next generation of students and Campbell residents here coming and speaking who have an interest in these kind of issues, I think all we can do to encourage the voluntary adoption of these things for people who want it, not force it on people who don't, but if it truly is a superior product, if the costs are affordable, then the laws of the market and supply and demand or went out that's a testable hypothesis rather than just saying we're going to go something uncertain or or do mandates and have all these questions out there so i'd like us to look at that that doesn't all have to be figured out before we adopt the final program um but yeah i would ask that you perhaps reach out to city political staff i i think they're happy to talk about that kind of program um and start thinking about that so that in future years, future work plans, we could start looking at programs like that. So that really is, as I've thought more, again, about what I think are very valid concerns and questions from the community. If we're going to do this, if we're going to encourage, I just think that's the right way to do it. So thank you for all your work. I'd be remiss to say for all you've done on this.

Thank you.

Yeah, thank you very much. And thank you, team, and especially Tiffany and Brian. Okay, thank you. Extremely comprehensive, exceptionally written, very impressive and clearly articulated. So really all across the board, a fabulous city of Campbell Climate Action Plan. I was particularly impressed with the community outreach and coordinated response. We got a whole bunch more response in the last day. But the clarity of the recommendations and prioritizations allows for a focused response to make decisions at the staff, commission, and council level. I really like hearing from the Silicon Valley Youth Climate Action Team. Just that's why we're doing this is from that. But I really wanna be Campbell focused. I really want to emphasize that, yes, there are other indicators, but let's be Campbell-focused on this. I did reach out today to, as I said, on the Silicon Valley Clean Energy Board and asked them for a response to the Climate Action Plan. And I think it's... a good perspective to really include in because they have a ton of resources. I go there and I see them. And they're asking for where they can apply. And just I've included it as a desk item for today. So you can see the entire component of it. And it has to do with the incentive that they just had for heat pump water heaters. But buildings are responsible for almost half the greenhouse gases of the region. Addressing the pollution is important to meet our climate goals, and modern heat pumps are ultra-efficient. However, the upfront costs of converting to electric equipment is higher than fossil fuel equivalents, and thus care should be taken in how Campbell approaches this transition. That's verbatim from Silicon Valley Clean Energy, and I think we really need to take that to heart. Now, they go on to say that SVCAE serves as a technical resource to member agencies like Campbell to support climate action goals. Each community is unique and SVDC does not prescribe solutions, but rather offers resources to help cities implement what works best for them. And these resources include rebates, technical assistance, communication, resources, and grants. I think we really want to capitalize on that opportunity to be able to also get perspectives from what other cities like Palo Alto have done on that. That said though that I've emphasized this before and I do though strongly oppose any mandates and any reach codes. The wording, when you read the wording of BLD-3 on its own, I know the other components talk about incentives and education, but if you just turn to that page and read that paragraph, it reads on its own as a mandate and must be implemented. So I really want to see that change because you have to, the constituents are going to do this. And in three years from now, they're going to pull that line item and that plan and read it to us and say, hey, why haven't we done this? So I think we want to be very thorough in our review of those so that we are encouraging, we encourage, educate, and incent, but not incense. So careful on that enunciation. But I think it's important for us to do it. We had 60 incensed emails that we got today. So I think we need to be really careful and thorough that we're doing it. I had all sorts of comments about individual points that I just loved. The tree canopy, I talked about my history of breathing air in the Chicago area, running around as a kid and wondering why I was coughing all the time when I was perfectly healthy. Well, that's the inversion layer. So we definitely want to be able to match to that so that we can really be good and it's good to see them going off to school since they got a full school day tomorrow. To your specific requests in the council direction that you're asking for, I wanna emphasize the supportive actions rather than punitive. And really that has to be throughout the whole, looking at each component of the program focus on education incentives? Absolutely, yes. Having an implementation plan is important because it gives us the justification to go as a roadmap for Proposition 4 funding. I think that's a opportunity for us to be able to utilize. That's where we can get funding. I'm not sure we're gonna have it as a budget, given all the other discussion we've had, but Proposition 4, I think, is an opportunity for us to do, and I think the plan gives us the basis to get to it. And the updates, I understand the data collection. I've been an environmental data collector, and I've talked about my decades-old experience with it. Actually, I just did eDNA testing over the weekend. I'll tell you about that. It's pretty cool. But doing an update every two or three years to be able to capture the data, I think, is so that... all the data is very important for us to be able to do it if you don't have data you just have another opinion so let's let's keep up the data but again i want to emphasize that it's extremely comprehensive just terrific work that everybody did on that so great work thank you vice mayor bobby thank you again it was a great report and a lot of work went into it thank you sean for

your tenacity and, bringing this forward and staying on top of the council and urging us to do this. I would just add a couple of brief comments based on the information that we received today and the miscommunication. I think we could do a better job of including some kind of a disclaimer in the document at the outset of it, that it's a guiding document. It's to provide information, education, and encourage people. Where there's aspirational goals, those should be better highlighted so that there is an expectation that it is aspirational. It may not necessarily get implemented based on resources that are available. I consider it a living document, and I think it should be updated periodically. I think a two-year cycle would be reasonable, and it forces the scheduling of it so that it, you know, five years doesn't go by and it's like, oh, we should have been, you know, reviewing this. And again, a lot of it to me is managing expectations with resources and available funding. I think we need to really be cautious about committing funds and city resources given the uncertainty of our budget and the unknown amount of cost that would be needed to help residents implement some of these retrofitting suggestions. That's it. Thank you.

Thank you. Likewise, I appreciate the report and the community outreach. I realize that all you can do is sort of have a number of community meetings, which you did, and invite people to come and simply capture the comments of people who come. Now, it is probably true that many of the people who come are advocates for it, and many of the people who are not opposed to it, just simply wouldn't come necessarily. So I take the community input for what it's worth. We have many sources of community input, including lecture letters and communications that come to us by email or other comments, such as meetings, such as this, and oral requests and things like that. So a number of people did talk about the potential costs involved in the future. And I would like us to have in our report suggestions of things that we know of right now that might serve as incentives and how we can encourage people to apply for programs and funds that could be available. Likewise, I would encourage the public to communicate directly with the Bay Area Air Management Control District, as well as our legislators. They are the ones that mandate a lot of these things and we can, we can be advocates as elected officials, but what matters a lot more is when people write individual letters or emails or communications or calls to offices of the persons who are on the boards and are elected officials. So I think including that kind of contact information in our report would be very helpful as well to make it as easy as possible for persons to communicate with the Air Quality District, as well as our California state legislators, who pass, as I mentioned earlier on other subjects we've covered tonight, all kinds of rules and regulations regarding housing, and then they expect us to be the implementers of it. So I think There are going to be greater efforts made throughout the country to have more health efficient type of systems for us as new systems come along and old systems eventually go by the wayside. But as long as it's done gradually and as we provide as much support as we can to our residents to enable them to do this, I think the better. And I know this is going to be a living document. And even though the two-year cycle, which I think is very reasonable, I'm sure if something comes up in the meantime, you will bring it to our attention and the public's attention as well. So I thank the staff, city manager and staff, and executive team, and all those who've played a role in all of this. Thank the public once again for your input. And with that, I think we'll conclude this subject.

Thank you so much.

Thank you. Moving to item 11. Simply, these are council reports. Does members of the council have reports they'd like to share with us?

I'll just go over. I attended the West Valley stormwater board meeting and a good, healthy discussion that we had on that, as well as then the West Valley waste and recycling discussion, so excellent discussions on that. Attended the Silicon Valley Clean Energy Board of Directors meeting and Again, more excellent discussions around that, building the relationships that allowed me to be able to get that feedback that I was discussing today. I've also been appointed to the Silicon Valley Clean Energy Finance and Administration Committee as well. I commented before about doing a shout-out to the Public Works on the Hamilton. Take a drive on Hamilton Avenue just west of San Tomas, just up to the Safeway gas station. It's beautiful. The PMI on that is off the chart, so just great. Finally, I want to do a shout-out to the Pruneyard Cinemas. They're a fantastic venue to be able to go to in a number of different ways. So thank you, Mayor.

Mayor Weill?

So I attended a few ceremonial type events. The library opening was a great, greatly attended and great community event. The PD award ceremony and swearing in of new employees. The county peace officer memorial ceremony was held last week and it was a very moving tribute to the fallen officers. And I attended the bogey festival and as well as the city's association meeting last week and the museum board meeting last week as well. And I want to also give a shout out to public works on the management of the Hamilton project and the amount of signage and public information that's been to avoid or try to avoid some of the traffic congestion. So you've done a great job so far.

Thank you. I did attend the events mentioned by Vice Mayor Bybee and the library grand opening was quite a success, very well received by the community and we should be proud of our library. And also had the opportunity to attend my first Policy Advisory Committee meeting of the Valley Transportation Authority and interacted there with a number of council members from other cities regarding transportation plans and the future that we plan for this valley. So that's all I had. With that, I thank everyone for... Oh, I'm sorry.

I didn't see you raise your head or anything. It's okay. I'll be very brief. I would just highlight the regular board of directors VTA meeting as well. And a couple of things. I think one of the things, one thing that I'll mention is that the board did move forward a version of an ICE policy as well, which I think generally matches with what the city has looked at. But happy to share more information on that if any colleagues or members of the public are interested. The other thing, we also had an update on the planning for FIFA and the World Cup and public transportation, which presents greater logistical challenges than the Super Bowl because it's in a variety of different locations and spread across time as opposed to one central location on one day. I'm actually very optimistic. I think as we get closer to the date, it's looking much more manageable than we initially anticipated. And I'm hopeful it'll be a positive experience, not just for visitors, but for our residents as well to be able to move around. So a lot of planning that has gone into that. That's all for me.

I will adjourn the meeting.