City Council - Regular Meeting

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay.

Good evening, everybody. Good evening, everybody. Good evening, great. Welcome to City Hall. You are at a City Council meeting. This is a special joint meeting of the Hayward City Council, Redevelopment Successor Agency, and the Housing Authority Board. I'd like to call this meeting to order. It is June 2nd, 2026. And if I could call upon Mayor Pro Tem Syrup to do the Pledge of Allegiance, please.

Please stand if you're able.

Okay, Madam City Clerk, if you can please take roll.

Good evening. Council Member Andrews. Present. Council Member Bonilla, Jr.

Present.

Council Member Goldstone. Present. Council Member Roach. Present. Council Member Sire.

Present.

Council Member Sermonio. Mayor Salinas.

Present.

Thank you.

Thank you. Next, I'd like to call upon our city attorney, Mr. Lawson, if you could please give closed session announcement.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. The closed session convened at 5.30. First, the council met with its property negotiators. The properties under negotiation are all identified in detail on the posted agenda. The council gave direction to staff but otherwise took no reportable action. With respect to public employment, Mayor, I will defer to you on the item and the council action.

no action was taken. Thank you.

It's on the city attorney's evaluation, to be clear.

Yes, city attorney's evaluation, there was no action taken. Thank you. Next, we have a special presentation, and I am very pleased to have with us, joining today, is, we have a group of folks, KJ, from the co-chair of Cal State East Bay's LGBTQ plus staff faculty, staff and faculty association. KJ, you here? Let's give KJ a big round of applause. Sure. And then is it Alex Karen or Kaven? Karan. Karan. Oh, okay. Alex Karan from the Chabot College Queen Queer Educators Network. Welcome. And also, well, of course, Robert Lopez from former organizer of Hayward Gay Prom. Mr. Lopez. Pastor Lopez. Forgive me. And then, of course, from the Hayward Public Library, Melissa Berkley. Melissa? Where's Melissa? Oh, there you are. Of course. And then Tina Kim. Tina? Nice. Oh, no, is it Tina or Gina? Tina. Tina.

Gina.

Gina. Oh, okay, Gina. Gina Kim, okay. And then, of course, joining us from LGBTQ Plus Community Advocates, or LGBTQ Plus Advocates and Champions, Kim Smith and Jade Moncado. Jade, yeah, welcome. Welcome. Yesterday started Pride Month and today, well yesterday and of course today we started flying the pride flag outside. We do have a special formal ceremony next week. June 11th at noon It's here in the front at City Hall. We are inviting all and And so please join us next week But I do have a proclamation that I will read and then if after I read the proclamation if we could have all of the folks from the groups meet us here in the front we have proclamations for you. And I have one really nice one with a nice gold frame and I'm going to have to decide between now and by the time we get down there on who gets the nice fancy one with the gold frame. But I will wait. So I'll tell you what, why don't you hold that and then I will pass these this way. And I have to take my glasses off because these are often... So this is a proclamation by the city of Hayward uh designating uh june lgbtqia plus pride month and um so here goes uh proclamation whereas the city of hayward has a diverse lesbian gay bisexual transgender questioning queer intersex two-spirit and gender non-conforming community and it is committed to supporting visibility dignity and equity for all people in the community And whereas Hayward has long endeavored to foster a welcoming community for LGBTQIA plus residents, businesses, and organizations, and whereas Hayward was among the first cities in the country to be home to a gay prom event hosted by Project Eden's Lambda Youth Group, a program of Horizon Treatment Services, which provided an annual venue for affirmation and celebration for nearly three decades, And whereas the City of Hayward is celebrating Pride Month through inclusive exhibitions, library materials, and programming at the downtown branch of Hayward Public Library, And whereas the Intersex Inclusive Progress Pride Flag created in 2021 unites the traditional rainbow pride flag with symbols honoring LGBTQIA plus people of color, transgender people, intersex people, and those affected by HIV, AIDS, and stands as an emblem of visibility, inclusion, and the diversity of the Hayward community. And whereas on June 4, 2024, Hayward acknowledged its commitment to be an inclusive, equitable, and compassionate community by resolving to fly the Intersex Inclusive Progress Pride flag throughout every June in honor of LGBTQIA Plus Pride Month, in city hall plaza and whereas the city of hayward will host a ceremonial flag raising of the intersex inclusive progress pride flag on june 11 2026 at hayward city hall at 12 o'clock Now, therefore, I, Mark Salinas, Mayor of the City of Hayward, on behalf of the Hayward City Council, do hereby proclaim the month of June, 2026, as LGBTQIA plus Pride Month. Ladies and gentlemen, let's give Pride a big round of applause. It is at this time what I'm going to do is I'm going to defer to Councilmember Ray Bonilla, Jr. for some remarks.

Good evening, Mayor, colleagues, and members of the community. It is an honor to join my fellow council members in recognizing June as Pride Month. As a proud gay man and member of the LGBT plus community, this recognition is deeply personal to me. Pride is a celebration of authenticity, courage, and the freedom to be who we are. It is also a reminder of those who came before us, who fought for equality, dignity, and acceptance so that future generations could live more openly and more safely. I am incredibly proud to serve a community that embraces diversity and inclusion. Hayward is strongest when everyone feels seen, valued, and welcomed, regardless of who we are or who we love. As we celebrate Pride Month, let us continue building a community where every person can live with dignity, opportunity, and a true sense of belonging. Happy Pride Month, and I look forward to taking a picture with all of you guys as we move to this next stage. But happy Pride Month and thank you for being here. Thank you, Mayor.

Okay. Well, here I am again, one year later. And on my way walking in, passing the flag poles, it made me think about where we find ourselves in this moment in history. We don't have to pay you $600 to fly a flag, as it has been in a certain city. We didn't have to ask you, Mayor, to paint a progressive pride flag literally on the flagpole as a mayor did in Idaho because the governor refused to have it flown. When I see the beautiful flags that are going to be flown this month, Pride, Juneteenth, my mom from Texas educating me on that, it's not just about pride. It's about resistance. It is about resisting those who wish to take away our rights, our dignity, our self-determination, our families. We have been deported. We have been put in camps. We've been separated from our children. And the list goes on and on. We've all been impacted in this last year. when we fly these flags, when we fly that American flag, it's not just pride and who we are, but it's also a calling to the resistance when our constitutional rights are in danger. And as elected officials, I know that I can count on this city council, to be part of that resistance and to ensure that the citizens and those who live in Hayward know that their rights and privileges are protected. That's why we voted you in and that's why we've been reelecting you. And we all benefit by both the pride that we have in who we are and the resistance that we put forward to let others know that we don't stand alone in the dark, but that we stand united as a people, as a community. And for that, I thank you for acknowledging this day for us who are educators, who are researchers, doing prevention with young people, with young adults, getting an education. So that way, we can offer back to our communities, as Councilmember Ray Bonilla has, Junior has, I need to put Junior on here, has, and Francisco Sustarremeno's education, and our mayor, education in who we are as raza, as well. You know, I took what I learned from my parents and the struggle with the Movimiento, with the causa, and that flag of the UFW has as much meaning for me now as when I see that progressive flag. And so, I have nothing else to say but that I am truly grateful that you stand with us at this time in resistance and in pride. Thank you.

Mr. Lopez, I think you spoke for everyone. Let's give Mr. Lopez another round of applause. I agree. I think you could not have asked for a better council to stand as allies and as united. Yes, it is a resistance. Some days are tougher than others, but if we continue to work together We continue to fight with each other, you know, fight together, not fight with each other, but fight together. We will certainly overcome this. So thank you for your words and thank you for your wisdom. And I would be remiss to say, You know, thank you for your decades of work. You know, you're a pastor, and I know you've been in this space for a very long time, working with kids and, you know, working with youth and young adults. And at times when folks would not, right? And you and your colleagues have been at the forefront of this for a very, very, very long time. So thank you, Pastor Lopez, for all of your work over the years. Appreciate it. Thank you. Okay. No, okay, all right. This is, you know, in the classroom, we call this the two-minute wait, because usually someone raises their hand. okay um okay uh so i'd like to move on to the next item which is public comment um this is reserved for anybody who would like to make a public comment on something that is not on the agenda um we there are uh i know i have public comments on agenda specific items so i will wait to call these when we get to those specific agenda items but is there anybody here that would like to make a public comment on something that is not on the agenda I don't have any cards. Let me see if there's anyone online. There is nobody online. So what I'd like to do is I will close public comments and I will move on to city manager's comments. Madam city manager.

Great, thank you. Good evening, Mayor, Council. I would like to start by announcing that the city will begin enforcing existing parking time limits on streets and in city parking lots and garages in the downtown area starting July 1st. While parking is free on city streets and in city lots and garages, we want users to start observing time limits where posted, and keep in mind that overnight parking is prohibited in our lots and garages. Why are we doing this? It is primarily to ensure we are providing adequate, conveniently located parking for customers, patronizing local businesses, and for people otherwise visiting downtown Hayward. In addition to general communications about this change, we have reached out directly to downtown business associations and businesses directly, and residential property managers. To accommodate individuals working downtown who require longer-term parking, we've identified a few locations where that will be allowable, and those locations are identified in orange on the map. For residents who need it, there are overnight parking options available that are generally allowed on the city streets in downtown. And as a next phase, we plan to introduce a parking permit program to meet the longer-term parking needs of people who live and work downtown. Thank you, and if I'm open to any questions.

Thank you. Actually, just rolling out the parking, enforcement on the first, would you say that it's gonna be hard enforcement right from the go, or will it be a soft enforcement right from the go?

I'm gonna take the easy way out and say it's gonna be right in between.

Oh, okay.

I mean, we'll have two community service officers that'll be staffing this over the course of the week, and we will not be just going, you know, It's enforced in downtown, but there are other parts of downtown that they'll also be enforcing. There's other work that they'll be doing. So we're not going to just be ticketing people all the time, but we will be enforcing the time limits. But, you know, it's not going to be soft or hard.

Yeah, okay. And, you know, I just wanted to say that, you know, if there has been a comment I have heard about downtown is that people – you know uh downtown is becoming more active it's becoming more busy and um you know and we want to see uh cars moving in and out and give everyone an opportunity uh to hang out in downtown and shop and have dinner and and participate in the restaurants in downtown so that's one of the reasons why we're doing this so so thank you very much is that it Thank you very much. I would like to move on to our consent calendar. I do have somebody in the audience who would like for me to pull item or he wants to make a comment on item number 14 and I did not get any, or comments up here. So what I will do is I will move to public comment and I'll call upon Mr. Ahmed Sharab to come on up. Mr. Sharab, how are you?

is that working okay good evening happy election day um i just wanted to uh provide my strong support for this consent item uh when we say we'll no longer accept our our grandmothers our fathers our mothers our children being killed in these streets you know this is exactly what it looks like and uh when we say we commit to vision zero, this is what it looks like. So I wanna just thank the hard work of the staff for their continued commitment to this end and members of the infrastructure committee, Mayor Salinas, Council Member Andrews, Mayor Pro Tem Syrop for your continued support in this vision and I hope that everybody else can, the rest of the council can do the same, thank you.

Thank you. So I'd like to, let me see. I don't see any more public comment online, so I will close public comment and I'll entertain a motion.

I'm happy to move the consent items, Mayor. I'm happy to second it.

I think I asked the question too fast, and I have to pause to refresh.

I would give my motion for the technology to catch up. There we go.

Okay, there we go. All right, so did you hit the button to comment? Okay, okay.

I do have a comment, though, or a question slash comment.

So moved by Councilmember Bonilla, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Syrup, and I'll give Mayor Pro Tem Syrup an opportunity to speak to his second.

Thank you. Just on item nine, as it relates to dispersing funds for Regis Village, I just wanted to clarify with city management, I think there have been conversations we're having with our public safety partners to reduce the burden it's putting on city resources. And I just wanted to make sure that with the disbursement of these funds, we're also communicating our needs as a city with this new development. Can you just speak to that a little bit?

Yes, absolutely. We are in active conversations both with the county who is a co funder of the Regis village project as well as with backs that owns and operates that the village Regis village and we are our chief both our chiefs and our and our other staff community services staff are in ongoing conversations about how to reduce the burden on our calls for service in our public safety department. So we are taking a very proactive approach to this.

Yeah, I just wanted to make room for my colleagues if they wanted to add to that discussion as well.

I'll also request for us to connect with the state as well on support for this facility. Sure, we're happy to do that. Thank you.

Council Member Roach.

Thank you, and I just wanted to clarify on this item that this money is coming, we're just asking, acting as a pass-through, this is not general fund money from the city going to BACS, right?

That's correct. That is why we're recommending it, is that we're actually receiving funds that will help us pay for this project.

Right, so it reduces our burden, actually, on what our obligation might be for the navigation. Okay, thank you so much.

Okay, so moved by Councilmember Bonilla, Jr., Seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Syrup, Madam City Clerk, please take roll. And I think the item

Council Member Andrews, how would you like to vote?

We're getting there.

Okay, thank you.

There we go. And it passes unanimously. Thank you. Moving on to a work session, and this is a work session. We will not take action on anything right now. We will ask questions of staff and direct staff to go in a particular direction. But this is item number 19, WS26-014, Safe Streets Downtown Project. also referred to as the loop, the loop. Update and recommendations. And this report is gonna come to us by way of our public works director, Mr. Amiri, Alex Amiri. And I was informed that you have more than five slides. Take all the slides necessary for this item, sir.

Thank you very much, sir. Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Mayor and Council Member. First, I want to thank you for just approving the Hayward Safe Street, A, B, and Tennyson. I appreciate that. And also to say that I'm very excited to be here to address one of the long-standing issues in downtown Hayward, which is the loop and how to fix it. We have prepared the report that we are going to present to you. We are looking forward to receiving your comments. Byron Tang, who is our newly minted Deputy Director of Public Works for Transportation, is here to present the report.

Byron?

All right, good evening, Mayor Salinas and City Council. I'm here to present on the project for redesigning the loop called Safe Streets Downtown. This project is a long-awaited project. Fortunately, we got Safe Streets and Roads for All grant funding, federal grant funding to do this planning work. And this project seeks to achieve the strategic roadmap project of evaluating alternatives to the downtown loop. So the purpose for today is we're gonna give an update to the project, talk about some of the options that have been brought forward, and then seek city council guidance and direction on moving forward with these options and staff recommendations. I'd like to introduce Halit Modi, who should be online. She is a principal from Farron Piers, and also the project manager from the Farron Piers side. Farron Piers is the consultant, city's consultant for this project. And then also in person, a familiar face and name, Hugh Lauch is sitting here. He's also a principal from Farron Piers, and they both can help answer with questions after the presentation is done. Okay, so in 2013, the city created the loop when the Route 238 bypass as a project did not go forward. And what the city did at the time was they converted a network of two-way streets and converted them into one-way. That happened in 2013. Unfortunately, there were some consequences that had a negative effect from that. Mainly, one of the big consequences was safety. From 2013, we have data that shows that collision happens on the loop every 11 days, and on average, one and a half people either get seriously injured or die every year. This year, Two people have already died and we have not been halfway through the year yet. One thing this project looks to achieve through Safer Streets is getting us closer to the downtown specific plans vision of a thriving downtown and just words from that long range vision from that specific plan is to provide shopping, entertainment, employment, and housing options for residents and visitors of all ages and backgrounds that is accessible by bike, foot, public transit, and car. Through our outreach visit project, we've found that many residents have concerns about the loop. Over 75% have shown and given us feedback that they have serious concerns, and I'll talk a little bit about that in a later slide. So there are four main goals to this project. As a top priority, to create safer streets. And this aligns with the city's Vision Zero goal to reduce fatality and serious injury collisions to zero by 2050. But in addition, there are other important goals, including promoting the economic vitality so people can live, shop, and work in downtown and feel welcome. And it's just not certain groups of people, but these are all people of all ages, backgrounds, income level, choice of transportation, so that they can feel safe accessing downtown and businesses and food and work and where they need to go. The technical work that is being done by this project team will position the city for funding in the future. Right now, the planning phase is currently funded by this grant, but all the other phases, including environmental, design, and construction are not funded yet. So this is a snapshot of the project schedule and where we are at. The project started in 2025. Phase one was to analyze the safety needs. That included a very long outreach period where we looked to find the needs and really understand the issues and concerns people have when they are navigating the loop. Phase two of the project, Develop and Evaluate Options, started also in 2025 in the fall, and it started with a design charrette, which I'll talk a little bit about the details in the later slide. Phase two has gone all the way up to this point, and we are at a critical milestone where we will be asking for direction and giving a staff recommendation on the following phase of the project. So in phase one, we really seek to hear everyone, residents, businesses, on what their concerns are for the loop. What we heard was a strong desire for change. We were able to do this by hosting a website and a survey on that website. We had many ways of getting people informed of this, which included in-person events, having decals on the pavement. We did use social media. We did a lot of different ways to reach people. We found that 90% of the survey respondents live in Hayward. And some of the main themes we found, people really overwhelmingly said driving is confusing in the loop. Biking and walking feels unsafe. And it's important to have support for local businesses and places where people want to go so they can go and be excited about going to downtown. Phase two of the project started with a design shred. And in this event, we invited stakeholders, residents, and businesses to really come together and have a blank canvas to really reimagine what the loop could look like. And what we got was, many visionary ideas of how the Loop can be transformed. We saw a lot of themes that were common, like for example, pretty much almost everyone preferred a two-way circulation for the Loop. There was a lot of preference for additional pedestrian space to support downtown businesses, and of course, desire for increased safety and slower speeds for vehicles. It continued with an open house where residents and stakeholders were invited to provide feedback on a lot of these visions that came out of this charrette. And I'm gonna talk a little bit about that in the next slide. So from that, we distilled the ideas from the Charette and basically went to the Council Infrastructure and Airport Committee and presented four different options that kind of had the themes of the Charette plus a baseline option that didn't change a lot. So the baseline option kept the loop as a one-way network and had some safety enhancements and roadway capacity reductions, but they were limited. The second option was the downtown grid option, which came from the Charette. And this option removed a segment of Foothill Boulevard and recreated the street grid to look like a downtown grid. And the third option kept the current alignment but converted it to two-way and had some major capacity reductions to Mission Boulevard and A Street, but kept Foothill Boulevard as the main through street. The fourth option is kind of similar to the third option but had additional measures to increase the capacity for Foothill Boulevard. We presented this to SEAC in October and they, for the purpose of moving forward to do some further analysis and outreach, and they selected option two and three. From that point, we renamed those options to option one, Downtown Grid, and option two, Civic Avenue. So if you aren't confused already, I'm trying to set it straight, but from here on, option one is Downtown Grid and option two is Civic Avenue going forward. So now I'm gonna go over the project team took these options and kind of prepared for the next round of outreach, which included different variations of the options, ideas about what to do about B Street and C Street. So I'm just go over those so everyone sees what was given in the outreach and what was studied. So this is the existing configuration of the loop as it is, where Mission Boulevard has three through lanes going one way, A Street has four through lanes going one way, and Foothill Boulevard has three through lanes going one way and various turn lanes that terminate throughout Foothill Boulevard. So this is the downtown grid option. Mission Boulevard is shown with two lanes in each direction and now two-way. A Street is shown with two lanes in each direction and also two-way. Foothill Boulevard, if you can see on the graphic to the right and the red lines there, that's the segment that was removed. And Foothill Boulevard is now one lane in each direction with added bike lanes for this option. There is also a widened sidewalk, if you can see that. This is a photo simulation of how Mission Boulevard could look like with a downtown grid option. And this is how Foothill Boulevard could look like in that option. For the Civic Avenue option, it's kind of flipped, where Foothill Boulevard now is, it remains continuous, but it has two lanes in each direction with a median and widened sidewalk. And now Mission Boulevard and A Street both have one lane in each direction with a bike lane. And this is a photo simulation of how Mission Boulevard could look under this option, the Civic Avenue option. And this is Foothill Boulevard. So in addition to that, Civic Avenue, since Foothill Boulevard still remains continuous, the team thought of different options of how to treat D Street. The intersection of D Street and Foothill is skewed, which sometimes can present problems when it comes to having good turning lanes, turning movements, and also visibility. So we, through this, wanted to get input from outreach on what people prefer when it comes to would D Street be better to be split into two intersections, as shown here, or remain continuous, as shown here? In addition, B Street, within the loop, is also something that should be considered, because currently it is now one way. So the team has shown these conceptual shots, and I wouldn't say, I wouldn't put too much detail on this. This is just visions of what it could look like. But for example, starting from the top right, that is keeping it, B Street, one way. Then going to the bottom left would be converting B Street to two way. And then three, there's an option where certain segments of B Street could potentially be a pedestrian plaza, which means cars would not be able to go through and that space would be utilized for pedestrians and placemaking and other opportunities. And lastly, the team, since C Street right now is also one-way, the team has proposed an option where C Street is converted to two-way from Mission to Foothill, and by doing so, one lane in each direction, a two-way cycle track is added on one side of the road. Because of the narrowness between Watkins and Missions, that has to remain one-way, though, in this option. So I know what a lot of people are thinking, especially when it comes to traffic and what happens when you have these options. So the team ran a traffic operation and diversion analysis, and I'm gonna go over just the high level results of that. So in this chart, it charts all the intersections of the loop. To the left is the intersection delay in seconds, and that is a common transportation analysis metric. And it basically means the extra time that you have to wait at an intersection due to signal control, the amount of vehicles there. That's just a way of measuring delay, and often can be seen as like congestion, basically. So what we have here is a comparison between the existing and the two downtown grid and Civic Avenue options. So blue is the existing downtown loop as it is, measured by intersection delay. The green is shown as the downtown grid option, and the black is shown as the Civic Avenue option. And the biggest takeaway here is both this downtown grid and Civic Avenue option will generally increase congestion compared to existing, but the downtown grid basically increases congestion a lot more than the Civic Avenue option. At some intersections, it is three to four times in magnitude compared to the Civic Avenue option. The team also looked at the main pros and cons and summarized it in the next three slides as shown. So for the downtown grid option, it provides a great amount of safety and access by encouraging reduced speeds because of reduced capacity. There's shorter crossing distances on Foothill Boulevard. And the widened sidewalks and protected bicycle lanes on Foothill Boulevard also increase that safety and access aspect. From an economic vitality standpoint, the conversion to two-way streets will attract more visitors. And this is something we know because we've heard it from the outreach. Over 30% of people said that they would be encouraged to visit downtown more if it was more safer and easier to navigate. Also for this option, there's an interesting opportunity by taking out that Foothill Boulevard segment, there could be a potential reclamation of that land to be utilized for future parks or development. But that would be needed to be studied in more detail to really understand the value of that. And then for operations, as you saw on the chart, this option increases the congestion the most, is expected to increase the congestion the most because of disconnecting Foothill Boulevard. It is also known that with all things equal, converting from one-way to two-way can add a little more delay. So the team noted that here. For the Civic Avenue option, safety and access is also greatly increased. The reduced capacity encourages reduced speeds. The shorter crossing distances on A Street and Mission Boulevard. The wide sidewalks on Foothill Boulevard and the protected bicycle lanes on A Street and Mission Boulevard provide access to those other modes of transportation like cycling for pedestrians. From an economic vitality standpoint, it's similar than the other option, other than the removed segment. The conversion to two-way streets will attract more visitors, and also there's options to use parklets on Foothill Boulevard to enhance some of the business aspect of that. From an operations standpoint, this will increase congestion, but not as much as the downtown grid option. So here's a summary of the options and analysis. It's a pretty simple chart here where all the options increase safety and access, and it's expected to increase the economic vitality of downtown because these options also preserve parking. But as we know, the downtown grid is expected to increase congestion by a lot more than either Civic Avenue options. So I'm gonna go over the results. We had these options on the website for survey. So I'm gonna go over the results of what people thought about these options. So the city had four ways of engaging. We sent out utility bill inserts to all residents, notifying them of the online survey. We used social media. We also did some focus groups with some organizations like CRIL, AC Transit, and local businesses like the Chamber of Commerce and the Downtown Hayward Improvement Association. And just on that March 26th Chamber of Commerce focus group, from the businesses we heard, they supported the return of two-way streets, but really when it came to the two options, didn't have a strong preference on which one they favored. They did request for more parking enforcement, which is something that was spoke about earlier this meeting. But they agreed that, you know, there needs to be a reduction in traffic, but reasonable questions on how that would be achieved. And when it came to the pedestrian plaza, they did have some concerns about how that could actually work, and so they weren't sure about that. So now the results of the survey. When asked, the city received 350 responses to the survey. I know that doesn't seem like a big number, but this was a very complex survey that took a long time and had four different parts for people to give feedback on. But when it came to each option, there was a more preference to the Civic Avenue option, where 58% of respondents preferred that. And what did people say about the downtime grid option? Well, the most common support came from the added bike lanes on Foothill and that A Street was kept to four lanes. The most common concerns though was that the reduced Foothill capacity basically because it was disconnected and reduced down to one lane in each direction. There's mixed feedback when it came to four lanes on Mission Boulevard where half was split on whether it should be four lanes or not. And what did people say about the Civic Avenue option? Most common support came from the added bike lanes on Mission and A Street. And then people liked that Foothill was kept as the street that had the most through capacity, and it had a planted median. There's mixed feedback though on the overall roadway capacity and some people thought that it may not reduce cut-through travel and that this option still feels somewhat car-centric since it is pretty much aligned like how it is today. And some people also said it would be great to have more pedestrian and bike safety. For within the Civic Avenue option, when it comes to splitting D Street or keeping continuous, over 50% preferred keeping it continuous and valuing more connectivity. When it came to the three options for B Street, the highest support came to the pedestrian plaza option with 43%, followed by the two-way option with 30%, and last was the one-way option. And lastly, when it came to the C Street design, The majority of respondents agreed, either strongly agreed or agreed. A lot of this agreement came from supporting that C Street would become two-way and that there would be added bike lanes. There was questions about how the bike lane would affect on-street parking, and there was concerns that confusion of keeping that small section one way from Mission to Watkins and then converting it to two-way could cause some confusion. So now I'm gonna talk about staff recommendations going forward, and this is something we really wanna hear feedback from council on this direction. So I do want to say that these are all visions. And even though there are some details here, a lot of these details can be flexible in a sense. We still have to do the third phase of this project and then also detail design. So there's options to change certain things around. So it's not setting things in stone as you exactly see it. but staff is recommending to advance the Civic Avenue option, and this is greatly due to the analysis showing that this provides the safety benefits and the economic vitality benefits of the other option, but with much reduced congestion impacts. It also aligns with the committee's agreement that preferred this. For B Street, staff is recommending advance the two-way B Street design, but also not shutting the door on the pedestrian plaza due to the concerns heard from businesses and needing to really, I think we need to really look into this a little more. So evaluate the feasibility of an occasional pedestrian plaza in the future and continue to coordinate with the Chamber of Commerce and Downtown Hayward Improvement Association. For C Street, staff is recommending to go forward with the C Street design as it aligns with converting the loop to two-way since all the recommendations are two-way and it provides the bicycle infrastructure with more access to cyclists. So this is a summary of the staff recommendations. So going forward, the third phase of this project is to refine this design. There is another public engagement round as we develop the goal of this project by the end of 2026 and quarter one of 2027 is to develop a little more detailed concepts and a cost estimate so we can understand the cost going forward involved with the future phases. So as we develop this concept, we're gonna do another outreach phase and really get those details more figured out about what we really can do or can't do so we can get a better cost estimate. So that's coming ahead. All right, so next steps and questions and feedback. Our questions today is, do the staff recommendations align with council goals? And do the proposed options represent the community's vision? Additional input we're looking for is have adequate outreach analyses been completed for this early planning phase and what refinements outreach efforts analyses need to be explored in future phases if there are any and If there are additional questions or concerns you have That concludes the presentation.

Thank you Thank you and I just wanted to say, you know, I've been up here a while where I've have been taking historical notes, and I think you're the first person since I've been up here that have had an applause before you do your staff report. So, Director Emery, I don't know what you're doing in your department, but it's working for sure. Okay, thank you. What I will do is I will open up to public comment first and then I'll return back to the dais. So I do have a couple of cards here and I will go to first public comment is Ahmed Sharap.

That again? OK. Yeah, I'll keep it short. In general, I thank you, Byron, for the lovely presentation. Of course, he deserves a round of applause for that newly minted position. Well deserved. I support the staff recommendations, with the exception of how the concept looks on Foothill currently. I think it needs to have, being a major corridor, it needs to have robust and continuous bike infrastructure, especially with all the transit-oriented developments in the area. So I look forward to seeing those concepts in the next phases, and really we need to be evaluating the massive capacity of off-street parking in the area. As for the pedestrianization of B Street, actually got the opportunity to sit in on the Chamber of Commerce focus group with the businesses, and I respect the concerns of our business, esteemed business owners. the downtown character, what it is. So definitely I agree that it should be studied, but I'd like to see a time bound commitment on that, perhaps within a year from now to see results from that study. Yeah, thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Alejandro Hasso.

Hi.

Hi, everyone. Thank you. It's great to see this project come to this phase. I think for a lot of people, the Hayward Loop is really difficult to navigate. And yeah, I just want to strongly support the staff recommendations. I think from a cost-effective standpoint, it is definitely the most cost-effective solution. And also, this option allows for a phase rollout. Because I think, as we mentioned before, I think it's important to do pilots so that we understand like how people react to the changes and so that additional changes can be done to iron out the issues that come up. And yeah, this is a great option for that. And you know, it's interesting to see the support for the pedestrianizing of B Street, but I do think that it's probably best to do that as a later project. face just because like you know making these many changes you know it's gonna take time for people to adjust to the two ways like changing back to two ways and and also from a bicycle perspective from a cyclist perspective Even just changing back to two ways does make it easier to just get around and support the local businesses. Because if you're coming from BART, trying to go to B Street, you're going to have to loop around downtown to go eat at some of the businesses on B Street. but I do think that it's important to study that in the future, study pedestrianizing B Street. San Mateo is a great option. It's also called B Street, so that would be a, sorry. So yeah, I think it's important to study that further. But I do think that it's important to include bike lanes throughout downtown, because even though these might make it more efficient to get through downtown with a car. Unless we provide safe alternatives to driving, we won't be able to reduce congestion, because we just need to make it easier for people to get around without having to drive. That's the best way to reduce traffic. Yeah, lastly, I do think that there could be some issues that come up when you switch back to two-ways, like long traffic intervals. So I think maybe as a future phase, that could be further analyzed to see where more efficient intersections can be implemented while also reducing the crossing distances for pedestrians where possible. Thank you.

Thank you. I don't have any more public comments, so I will return to the dais. Council members, their menu.

Mayor, thank you, and thank you for the good report.

I'm impressed. It looks like we are emphasizing pedestrians, bicyclists, and the economy downtown. I'd like to see if it would be possible to expand the area of interest to include Second Street, so the border wouldn't be Foothill, expand it because we do have some businesses on Second Street so that would expand downtown. So I look into that, see if that's a possibility. I do like the option too. So we don't have any money for this. What is the cost? Ballpark figure.

So we don't have the cost information right now, but we want to have a concept in order to be able to look for opportunities to get some funding.

And it would be Measure B and Measure BB, I suppose.

Those are options, but there may be some other options available also.

Okay, so let's suppose that everything goes well, what would be the completion date?

It would take a number of years, I would say.

2060, 2090, I won't be around by then.

Sooner than that.

Sooner than that, hopefully. Okay, a little bit more about the pedestrian plaza. I like the idea. Why are we hesitating on planning it or looking into it?

We have to look into it a little bit more and study it. B Street does not have alleys, for example, in the back for deliveries, for mail and garbage and other things. The idea could be implemented on an occasional basis, closing the street for a short period of time to allow for these kinds of activities while we study to see what the challenges are ahead and come back to you with options.

Okay, and I'm glad that history is included there. One of the notes said that a con is that it would create more time for traffic? Are we worried about city traffic or are we worried about run-through traffic? I personally don't care about them. They can go and take 230 or 880. What are we worried about? What congestion are we worried about?

Generally speaking, most of traffic is thought to be cut through traffic, regional traffic, and that is what's going to be affected. The option that is recommended to you has a moderate effect on congestion. It is not as bad as the grid option. And a side benefit is that when cars slow down, there is a benefit to reducing speed and increasing safety. Of course.

Yes. All right. How will we fix parking on B Street? It would be a two-way. So right now, it's parking is set up in one direction. What would be planned there?

So some of the islands will have to be changed, not drastically, and then some restriping to allow for parking on the other direction. It's not going to be a major change.

Okay, all right. Let's see, I have a couple more questions, but so far so good. I like the fact that we are trying to reduce traffic. Oh, the traffic, the speed limit. 40, 30, 35, what are we looking at?

We'll have to take a look and see. We'll have to do speed surveys and other things to come up with appropriate speed for downtown streets.

All right.

Like I said, the pedestrian plaza is excellent.

What I want us to do is to ensure that the residents of Hayward have an easier time getting to downtown and shopping downtown. That's really what I want. I really don't care about the people who go from San Mateo to Livermore through our city. So is that something that's... you're thinking of? Is that the theme?

Absolutely, absolutely. That's part and parcel of that. One of the things that I wanted to mention to you is that this design is going to open the intersection of Jackson and Mission. Okay. Right now there is no left hand from Mission onto Jackson, so cars that come down, let's say Carlos B, will have to take Orchard Avenue or Fletcher in order to get to Jackson. That is going to open up and allow for local traffic not to have to go through residential streets and cause more congestion there. That is a plus that is with this option, associated with the option.

And I do like the split of Foothill, because in my mind that will allow us to perhaps have a pedestrian plaza there. That's right in that little circle there. I did see quite a few new trees, so thank you for that. And so I do like the plan. I do like option two. So please go on it, get us some money, and let's do this by next year. Thank you.

And of course, Director Emery, we care about all traffic because we hope that they stop and shop in Hayward, correct? Absolutely, yes. Absolutely. Mayor Pro Tem Syrup.

Thank you, Mayor. You read my mind. I was going to say this is not just to benefit our residents, but to make visitors enjoy our downtown more as well from outside of Hayward. So just for the purposes of direction, thank you for this report. And I'm in alignment with the staff recommendations. I wanted to share a little bit. And I also want to thank my colleagues on the Council on Infrastructure and Airport Committee, Mayor Salinas and Councilmember Andrews. We've done a lot of work on this over the years. And now Deputy Director Byron. I mean, what a project to cut your teeth on for the new title. So congrats on bringing this forward. I think this topic is one that we hear a lot about all the time. And I'm happy that we get to bring this thinking forward before the community. So yeah, I wanted to share some thinking around why the Civic Avenue option and why it felt important to move in this direction. The city has invested a lot in its downtown, but it's disconnected its downtown. So right now we're in City Hall, and dividing City Hall from the rest of the core of our downtown is three to five lanes of traffic going 35 to 40 miles an hour. Right next to the city hall is a beautiful library that we spent, I don't know, close to $90 million on. That's also divided from the rest of the downtown by three to five lanes of traffic. You hold an event on this plaza in our beautiful brand new library, in front of our beautiful brand new library, also new, and it's hard to hear what's happening on the plaza because you have that traffic rushing by you at 35 to 40 miles an hour. So really what I see the Civic Avenue accomplishing is connecting the fabric of all these pieces of the downtown that we've invested in and expanding the footprint of our downtown. So I've just talked about what's south of Mission, but then let's take a look at North Mission on the other side of A Street. You have Main Street that has some business buildings that have been disconnected from the downtown because of four to five lanes of A Street traffic. you have this massive investment. I don't know if anyone's had a chance to walk on the nice sidewalks on Northern Mission, but we just recently redid full protected bike lanes, full sidewalks. There's a ton of shops along there, but they're all disconnected from the foot traffic of our downtown as well. So the Civic Option to me is our chance to correct the past mistake of the loop and connect the fabric of our downtown to all these massive investments that we've made over the past 10 years and really expand the footprint and make economic development better for the downtown as a whole and give people more options to visit when they come to our downtown. I know that there are some concerns around traffic as lanes get reduced. And so there's a concept I wanted to share called induced demand. And the idea is when you add more lanes, people use those more lanes, and you actually increase traffic. And so I don't want to misguide the public and create any illusions that when we reduce some of these lanes, traffic's going to be tough for a while. People are going to have to get used to and adjust to the fact that they can't just use Hayward as a throughfare anymore. But over time, more people will stay on the freeway than will use Hayward as a thoroughfare. And it'll actually reduce traffic and make it so that it's easier for residents to get to their own downtown than having to navigate five lanes of traffic in between commuters to try to go to the bank. And so it's really this principle of induced demand that I think we're using here when we're trying to figure out which lanes are we going to cut back on and why. And that's why I think the Civic Avenue option makes a lot of sense. I'm appreciative that we are holding off on the pedestrian plaza for now. I think that plazas are really beneficial to downtown areas. We drive hundreds of miles to go to Disneyland and be in a walkable plaza. I think people like being in car-free spaces, but we have to make sure that we do it right. And I've spoken to a number of business owners downtown, and it's just clear that we don't have clarity ourselves yet on what that would look like. What furniture would go out on the plaza? Who is responsible for the maintenance of that furniture? Public safety and lighting concerns. Deliveries and shipping and how do we handle loading zones, right? There's a lot of questions that need to be answered. And so I think a pilot approach makes sense. And when I say pilot, it can be simple. I think Senator Weiner at the state level passed something called an entertainment zone ordinance where maybe, you know, Oakland has first Fridays. Maybe we... We allowed a few planters to block off a section of B Street, make that area become an entertainment zone, and allow people to enjoy patronizing the bars in that area to get a feel of what a pedestrian-free area looks like. And we could kind of work through the kinks. That's just an idea. I would defer to our conversations with the chamber and business owners to see what kind of pilot they would feel comfortable with trying. But I think we have to test these things out before we go for a bigger project, like completely redoing the B Street area. I had a question about some of the drawings for the B Street pilot. It looks like it's back in reverse parking. Is that correct?

Yeah, the concept shows that, but I think these were just more for example. It doesn't mean that we have to do that.

Okay, I would advise against that. I would say people will want to pull into their spots. I mean, I've driven around the Bay Area quite a lot, and there's maybe like one street on San Francisco that has the back in reverse parking, and it's unsettling a little bit, so I'm just not a fan of that personally.

Right, there are some, I think, studies that show that it can be safer, but I agree, a lot of people aren't used to it either, so.

Yeah, and I mean, the safety could also be compromised by people not knowing what to do there. I think with, you know, let's use Patrick Avenue as an example, right? We had good intentions on the implementation of Patrick Avenue, but people, there's a cultural unfamiliarity with the protected car bike lane, or maybe the lanes weren't wide enough, we can, you know, rehash that as much as we want, but I think we have to keep in mind, like, what is the parking culture and how do we transition that appropriately? And back in parking kind of freaks me out, but, you know, I would recommend against it, but I'll see what you bring forward, you know, with the direction you get from the council. And then I just really want to emphasize bike parking. I think, you know, we have Improve the bike infrastructure downtown, especially with the redoing of Main Street, and we've added in some bike parking there, but on B Street proper on C Street proper. Even the removal of one parking lane to make it half motorcycle parking and maybe three bike parking right like there's a way for us to expand parking options for other means of transportation that I think need to be really baked into this plan and very clear on where we plan on installing them. But otherwise, yeah, I think great work on this. Thank you for listening to the community's feedback. I'm really happy to see that the community is aligned with the recommendations that you're putting forward as well. And I appreciate the diligence that you've taken as staff to get as much input as possible from people of different backgrounds, different languages. And yeah, just, you know, I hope that I'm alive to see the completion of the new loops. So keep up the good work. Thank you. Council Member Andrews.

Do we still call it the loop if we change it? I don't even know. I don't know if that's the question I have. Yep, so thank you for presenting these options. I had a couple of questions. One is I've been looking at downtowns for a very long time and been comparing them to Fourth Street, Berkeley, Burlingame, San Mateo. And a lot of them don't have bike lanes. And is it because of it being just one lane each way? I'm just curious to see, have you studied those streets? Like University Avenue, for example, they don't have any bike lanes.

Do you wanna talk to them about that?

Welcome back.

So Hugh Louch with Ferrum Piers, nice to see you all. I would say, and Byron kind of said this earlier, some of the details about what goes into the space are to be determined, and there's still additional engagement and work to figure that out, so bike lanes are certainly an option on some of those streets as well, but I think the, what is shown is primarily what emerged kind of coming out of the Charette that we did in terms of what the community's priorities were at that time.

Okay. I was just wondering if you looked at the traffic studies of those cities that have narrow streets with no bike lanes versus this just just as a comparison. Just curious. Okay, I am interested also in the Civic Avenue option. I feel that we do need to do something different. We have seen a lot of accidents in this area and we also are seeing more activity. We're seeing more residents move to the downtown, particularly seniors. So I'm very concerned about the traffic safety downtown. I am also curious about the pedestrian plaza. I actually did write down San Mateo B Street because sometimes I do venture outside of Hayward occasionally, and it is quite different, the experience of that B Street versus our B Street. Just wanted to know if, I've only been there on the weekends, but I don't know if anyone has been there during the week, to see how that is functioning? Does it shut down or is it only on the weekends does it shut down? Does anyone know yet? I know you are gonna study it in the future, but I'm just curious if anyone knows.

Are you talking about San Mateo? Yes. Yeah, I think it's a full-time closure, permanent closure. And there are several other cities that have similar kinds of closures.

I would just, part of your research, actually talk to the businesses to see how they are impacted, because on Saturdays it's thriving, and I don't know what it's like during the week, but I imagine if it's still there, they're probably doing okay. But if you, I understand the concerns of the businesses of not wanting it, wanting to do it right away, but in the meantime, I'd love the design that was on here just even as conceptual. Can we just put it as a crosswalk now, just as a high visibility safety crosswalk in the interim if we can't do a full-on plaza? Is that something that is possible?

I know Director Rollman is here.

Maybe he can throw a nice crosswalk down in the middle of B Street, I'm not sure. He's ignoring me. It's okay. I'm talking to the new deputy director anyway.

Yeah, that's something we can consider. Okay.

Okay, great. And then also wanted to know about the survey. Do you know how many... Does it give you feedback of who filled out the survey by chance of?

Like it doesn't identify the specific person? Like businesses versus residents? No. Okay. No.

Okay. I was just curious if that's something to discuss further in your research on the types of businesses because a restaurant might feel differently than a salon just because of the type of use that's there. So I'm just wondering if that's something that we can do in research further.

I think that's actually something we've heard from the focus groups, where we did meet certain business owners who had different, for their business, they had a certain requirement or thing that they needed. We didn't really, I don't think we saw that in the survey, but when we met as a focus group, That was something we did get feedback on.

Okay, great. Okay. And then, yes, I am interested in the landscaping of the medians. I'm concerned about maintenance a little bit just because we've had some challenges with those medians. So I'm sure when you get further along the design, you can start looking at what are the options there. And then the last thing is the contiguous D streets. I know that there are some residents that live in that area. I don't know if you had the opportunity to maybe go door to door in that area, like near Watkins. They might be someone you wanna do more targeted outreach there. And then also the schools. I don't know if you can do specific outreach at the schools, because they do have a lot of students that walk through that downtown. And I think that's all the feedback I have for tonight. Thanks.

Thank you. Council Member Roach.

Thank you. Yeah, it's really nice hearing from my colleagues who serve in the Infrastructure Committee, because I don't, and so I haven't had as much experience in all the iterations that you got to, so thanks to everyone who serves on that committee. I'm glad we're talking about the LIB. This has been a huge topic of conversation ever since I moved to Hayward, and then once I got on council, so glad we're addressing it in this really comprehensive way, and I wanted to ask, we got a lot of emails over the last few days, and some people sort of upset that they were just now hearing about it, and we know this happens all the time, right, when there's some highlighting of a topic, then people think this is the first time anyone's talking about it, so I just wanted to appreciate the work you've done over the last year, and then ask, once there is a focus on a certain option, will there be more opportunity later for the community to help tweak it, excuse me?

Yes, yeah, so we specifically have a planned outreach phase later this year. As we develop the option going forward, we're gonna make sure we get more community input on that from businesses, residents, and stakeholders.

Great, and it sounds like, I think, Hugh just mentioned this, and I think you said the same thing, which is, even if we decide, like, if the staff recommendation, then it's option two, that even within that option, there's still gonna be opportunity to tweak those options, right, to where the bike lanes might be, what, excuse me, I don't know what I'm having, excuse me. You got my question.

Definitely, yeah. I would see these as, like, visions instead of set in stone details. Great. There's still a lot of things to work out.

Okay. Great. Thank you. And then just to get to the sort of items, on the D Street question, you know, whether to have it sort of jog over a little bit or whether to continue it straight, is that suggestion just being made? Because that is a pretty crazy, huge intersection. Are you just trying to break that intersection up?

Yes, it also, it's huge and monstrous, but it also has that skew where it doesn't meet at 90 degrees that sometimes can present problems. So yeah, but even if we keep it continuous as we're recommending, there's still a lot of safety improvements we can make. We're going to make it, it's going to be narrower, it's going to be smaller.

Okay.

But yeah, those were just two options to consider.

Yeah, I mean because I'm open to it if that sort of stops that you know Because that sort of throw away from D Street sort of heading up till people really try to beat that light every time I mean, it's a really it can be a dangerous intersection right there so I can see why you did but I'll be open to how that progresses right as the and Maybe that will come down to cost as well. Anyway, right and depending on some other option. Okay and then on on the Foothill Boulevard. I know there's some comments about making sure there's bike lanes on Foothill Boulevard, but I kind of see the utility in, if we are gonna try to, if we're allowing people to continue to come off 92 and onto Foothill and back out to 238 or out to 580, what I see it as, we're sort of trying to keep one street as that flow street, and everything else is bike lanes, which I'm glad about. I'm glad we do that. If we're trying to do that on one of the streets, right, to allow sort of traffic to move through, like, I'm comfortable with the way the option is, the recommendation. I would still definitely like to see pedestrian safety improvements on Foothill. I love the median. That will slow people down as well. So, I mean, for now, I can see it keeping that way unless, you know, I hear otherwise. Because I don't know that we have a robust biking structure coming off of 92 onto Foothill. And so the way the recommendation is now, I'm comfortable with that. But of course, for further study, further input from everyone, I'm happy with that. On the pedestrian mall idea, I love pedestrian mall. I think they're really fun. But I was reading a little bit about it because my knee jerk is, yeah, let's have a pedestrian mall. It sounds great, right? but I was reading about how it's one of those things that apparently it's not sort of if you build it, you will get foot traffic. It's more that if you already have a lot of foot traffic and it's already a really popular place to visit, then a pedestrian mall can be successful. But in areas where people have tried to create more buzz and bring more people downtown, they're not so successful. So I'm very interested in studying this further before we take any action. I love the first Friday idea. as a sort of Better way to do it, but I read one statistic and I'm sure there's updated data that that basically said you know that I Guess there was a huge push for them unlike the 60s and 70s and only about 20% of them remain successful So I would just want us to be very careful about that I don't want to do any more harm than the loop already did potentially to our businesses if we're trying to sort of write that wrong and let's not sort of add another wrong on top of that. So for now, a first Friday idea in the future is a great idea, and then we start it further. And then as we get more and more businesses downtown, as there is a buzz for that sort of thing, then we can look at that further. Let's see. I think that is it for now. Let me just look up further. Yeah, but otherwise, thank you for the hard work. I'm supportive of the staff recommendation on this one, and I will look forward to future tweaks on the designs. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Member Goldstein.

Thank you. Thank you for this short report. Also, congratulations on your promotion. Well deserved. Thank you. I'm super excited about revisiting the design changes, and I concur with my colleagues. I'm in favor of the Civic Avenue redesign. And I do have a couple of questions and concerns. One of them is you're probably familiar with an app called Waze. Yes. Have you ever used it driving around Hayward?

I use Apple Maps right now, but I know, yeah, it's probably similar.

So when I'm driving through Foothill in both directions, I kind of keep an eye on where traffic diverts, where it looks like they're trying to get shortcuts. And occasionally I test those out myself, not using the app, just kind of following the flow of traffic. and invariably what i hear from our residents is how much they resent this drive-through traffic through the neighborhoods and so my my biggest concern through this new process is what that impact may be I love the idea of, as Mayor Pro Tem Syrup mentioned, he referred to it as connecting the Frabic and expanding the business district. And I think that's a fantastic idea. And as Council Members Zermeno mentioned about also connecting up to Second Street, I think those are actually really brilliant ideas. But I'm also, like I say, I'm just concerned about what the response is gonna be. Those delay times really don't look significant, but for people behind the wheel that are just agitated and trying to get home, it does influence their behavior. And I just have some concerns about that. Do we have any mechanisms for evaluating that before we embark on a plan or do we have to implement it and then kind of look and see how people respond?

Yeah, we've actually, in the attachment that we have as part of the traffic analysis, we did do a diversion analysis. And I think, you know, not to sugarcoat it, it is expected when you have increased congestion, some people will divert. And we do show the probabilities or the kind of areas where our models would show it could happen. So definitely, especially in the short term, after changes are made, it can happen. But yeah, that is a possibility.

Okay, all right. Well, thank you for looking at that. I'm glad to hear that that's part of the plan. And I definitely like adding bicycle lanes and other infrastructure, places to lock up your bikes, safe places where people can park in, take advantage of the business. I happen to be a motorcycling enthusiast, and I didn't see any motorcycle parking on this, so I'll be hounding you about that. And I'm teasing you a little bit, but honestly, I am working with a bunch of different motorcycle organizations around the Bay Area and looking for ways to invite them to Hayward, and parking just happens to be one of those things. And it's fairly common when we go out as a group we may have four motorcycles occupy one car parking space so it's not a super big deal but the presence of motorcycle parking means that when someone is riding individually and looking to come downtown they have a place that they can park that's not taking up one full car parking spot so just something to keep in mind And then I am in favor of D Street being continuous, but I would yield my opinion to the preferences of the neighborhood, because they may be seeing things that we don't see. Thank you.

Council Member Bonilla.

Thank you, Mayor. Okay, I'll keep my comments brief because I think you heard a lot of great feedback from my colleagues that I generally agree with. I do agree with the kind of as a vision and as a concept, the Civic Avenue option. So I agree with staff recommendations. You know, first, I really liked the downtown grid. you know, option. But then when I looked at what that did to congestion and how significant that was, it sort of, you know, had me lean a little bit more towards staff's recommendations because I think it does bring a good balance of trying to balance the congestion, trying to slow things down. The safety benefits do come. I do appreciate the widened sidewalks and the protected bike lanes and the focus on how this is gonna help with economic vitality. When I was thinking about B Street, I do like the idea of keeping it continuous. I do support two-way on B Street, and the idea of exploring a pedestrian plaza, not to do it now, but I think in future studies, I would really like to kind of see how that would come about, but I also appreciate the caution that we heard from Councilmember Roche sort of about how those come about to be, but I do like anything we can do to activate that. So, you know, I think we heard some suggestions like a first Friday or just something like that, but just whatever we can do to really sort of bring out that vibrancy of B street and to make it more pedestrian friendly. And I just really liked that idea of a pedestrian Plaza, but I also want to be mindful to the business feedback that we heard from the chambers and from others. So I think as we, continue to explore that option, I would be interested to sort of just have that come back once we have a little bit more discussion around how that might be incorporated in the future. c street i do like the idea of c street being two ways and having bike infrastructure there um also for foothill um you know i appreciate that you know it we're still kind of keeping it uh one way but where we can adding more you know or at least studying where there's an opportunity for more bike and pedestrian safety, there I think would be important because we do want to make it as walkable as possible. And then I also really like the idea of the medians. I think not only will that bring a lot of beauty that project but i think it's also going to you know help us with with safety in that area as well i want to thank the community for their input and you know just highlight that there is another opportunity for the community to provide input and there's still so many details of this project to be worked out so as the community listens tonight you know we would love to hear your continued feedback and engagement in this project. And then lastly, just wanted to thank the infrastructure committee for all of the time and energy that they put into these recommendations because they do think that they're strong and directionally we're heading in the right direction. And I think it's quite responsive to the feedback that we heard from the community and more impressively, I really appreciate how this is being driven by the community because all of the feedback that we've heard Where the majority of the community has lied on these issues has tend to be what has made it into the staffs recommendation So thank you for being so responsive to communities and put I think that this is a real strong vision for how it is We can reform the loop. So thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you mayor Thank you.

Okay So I wanted to acknowledge my colleagues on the Infrastructure and Airport Committee, Mayor Pro Tem Syrup and Councilmember Andrews. You know, I also wanted to acknowledge the folks that have come to the meetings. You know, I know Bike Hayward, right? Bike Hayward? Bike Hayward, they show up, and they contribute to the discussion. And what I want to do is I just wanted to express appreciation for Mike Hayward coming to the meetings, but engaging in this process respectfully, professionally. And I think the fact that we've been able to land on something like this and and you agree is great. And I think, and based on the feedback we see in, you know, on the surveys, you know, there seems to be a lot of support here. You know, and when we can get, you know, community engagement folks aligned with, you know, the business community aligned with the neighborhood, I think we're in good shape. I'm gonna go along with staff recommendations. The people have spoken, so I'm gonna, you know, I'm gonna go with what staff has come up with. And I know my colleagues up here, you know, they have expressed a lot of sentiments that I share. So I will keep my comments to a very minimum. Mr. Amiri, do you have everything you need

I do. Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor and Council.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And I appreciate that. Okay, so I will close this item and I will move on to item number 21, which is PH26-026. This is the GAN limit adoption. Adopt a resolution establishing a GAN appropriation limit for fiscal year 26-27. This report is going to come to us by way of the finance director, Director Hillbrand. But what I am going to do is I'm going to forego staff report and I'm going to go straight to council questions once Director Hillbrant gets set up and the Madam City Manager.

I think the operating budget is next.

Is it? Oh, it is. We went from... NO. SO WE WILL NOT GO TO THE GAN ITEM. WE WILL GO TO Our public hearing, item number 20, PH26-024. And this is fiscal year 2026-27 operating budget and capital improvement program public hearing and adoption. Public hearing for the proposed fiscal year 26-27 operating budgets for the City of Hayward, Hayward Redevelopment Successor Agency and Housing Authority. Adoption of resolutions approving fiscal year 26-27 operating budgets and appropriations for fiscal year 26-27 and authorizing actions for the 2025-26 operating budget, THE FISCAL YEAR 2736 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2627 AND THREE THE OR THREE THE HAYWARD REDEVELOPMENT SUCCESSOR AGENCY BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 AND FOUR THE HAYWARD HOUSING AUTHORITY BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-27 AND THIS WILL COME TO US BY WAY OF OUR FINANCE DIRECTOR and I just wanted to, before we start this, I just wanted to acknowledge Director Hillbrandt and her team to get us here. This has been a very, very bumpy 18 months, and to be honest, You came to us and you quickly stepped into this role. And of course, our city manager also is new to the role. But I just wanted to acknowledge the incredible amount of work that your department has done on our budget both last year and this year, you fixed a lot of stuff. You found a lot of stuff and you continue to fix a lot of stuff. And I wanted to acknowledge that. I also wanted to acknowledge, and I know you're very humble and you always tell everybody every opportunity you have. Your team is absolutely all-star. And I know either they're here or I know they're listening. But, you know, you and your team's work on this budget has literally got us through what we were in or what we are in to where we are at today. So I just really want to express a great big thank you for that. And this was no easy task. But the good news is at the end of your report, there is good news. So, Madam Director, go right ahead.

Thank you mayor for the acknowledgement and mayor and council members for this opportunity to present. So this presentation is a follow on to our May 12th work session. So we'll spend a little bit less time on those numbers about going through the rest of this process. I do wanna be clear, there's still a lot to talk about and we'll be, as we'll talk about in one of the later slides, we will be going on with our monthly updates some additional updates through the full council and of course as needed um as as we go through the next um next year so um with that i wanted to talk about the budget timeline and calendar so um wanted to share kind of a typical calendar typically you know we've got a balanced budget in june We may have a few little updates along the way and come around to about January for a mid-year update. In our case, in November, when I arrived, we identified we had a lot of updates needed in this year's budget, 25-26. We were still making those updates into February. And actually, as we were going through the 26-27 development, we were learning a lot about 25-26. So a real learning process. And so our kickoff with the departments, normally January, February, that happened in March. Department submittals also happened in March. Meetings with city manager, I think at a typical budget, there's generally one, maybe some departments have two. In this case, most departments had two, little follow up. We post our budget document in April, this time in May. Work sessions in April, this time in May. And here we are in June, ready to adopt the balanced budget for 26-27. And again, really wanna acknowledge the staff. We effectively balanced two budgets in six months So acknowledging not just the staff of the finance team, the budget team is here. So Nick Mullins, senior management analyst, Fran Hatfield, management analyst, and Michael Barnes, the acting deputy director, who's also our revenue manager, just really stepped up as we did lose some senior staff during the last year. So really have taken advantage of opportunities for staff to stretch and grow and learn a lot and appreciated that. But it's not just our staff. So as I mentioned, departments were submitting in March, but they were ready to go. Departments had spent a lot of time thinking about their budget, planning for their budget. Some of these opportunities we found, as we talked about in May, were really identified by the departments, really digging in, understanding their numbers, understanding revenue opportunities. And so the department heads, acknowledgment of the department heads and their analysts or other members of their team that were really actively involved in this process. This was a lot of work and it required a lot of hands to get here. I also want to acknowledge city manager Ott and assistant city manager Mary Thomas, who Mary also had her slaves rolled up from the day I walked in the door. So really want to acknowledge all the support she gave our team. So from there, overall, we're looking at a $249 million general fund budget. It's balanced, but it's stretched very thin, a lot of short-term financing, not just Measure C, but some other funds that we identified as available to use. But it's one-time funds that were not just outside of the general fund. It's not money that's going to keep growing. We've also used funds out of our OPEB trust, our workers' compensation fund balance, And again, some eligible grant funds that potentially should have been transferred in prior years, but were notably available this year. So that was very helpful. There's still a structural deficit of about $30 million. We do need to look at new revenue opportunities. Of course, we'll be talking about one later this evening. Other revenue growth recoveries and cost control. So we're still looking at all of that on an ongoing basis. We've updated salary and benefits. We really had to do it different this year as we were learning a lot about our salary and benefits. And again, thank you to our labor partners. You'll hear that again, but most groups deferred COLAs, modified COLAs, took some overtime reductions, really significant changes and partnership from those groups. At this point, this budget does not include any potential revenue from a business tax measure. That does depend on voter approval. And so at this point, that is not a part of this balanced budget. So again, focus on the general fund. When we're looking at fiscal 25, 26, we've again had to make a lot of adjustments. We'll talk about that some more later. So we're looking at about a $241 million budget for this year, is where we think we'll end this year. And so for next year, 26, 27, we're looking at about $249 million budget for 26, 27. So a change of about $8 million The bulk of that is pen check, helpers, unfunded actuarial liability. That's a big chunk of that in the general fund, plus some other minor changes. Again, departments really did a lot to control costs, control overtime, as well as service and supplies costs. Since our workshop on May 12th, where we had about a $248.5 million budget, we did find some data entry corrections, worked with teams to correct those. To balance that and keep the budget balanced, we transferred in from our OPEB fund, not the same as our OPEB trust, which has some limitations. OPEB did have some excess money in there. You'll see in future as we're talking about the OPEB trust, we're still gonna highlight it for you as a short-term source, but it is in our books reflected as a revenue, not a transfer. And then we've made and are continuing to make a few administrative changes throughout the document. A key area for us that we've looked at a lot at is our staffing and position control. We've had over a 10% reduction in personnel in the general fund as well as in other funds such as internal service funds impacted by the general fund. Instead of salary savings, which was basically a negative expense, a credit against expense, that really was difficult to understand and manage for departments, we've just taken the vacancies out, a set of vacancies, as you'll see about 85 vacancies taken out, and departments will manage to that set of vacancies. So, for example, if a new vacancy occurs, we're seeking authorization to allow that to be filled, whether at that specific position level or perhaps in a different classification if that makes more sense for the department. So as part of our resolution, we're asking for city manager authority to make those adjustments and that list will be maintained between finance and human resources working closely with city manager and the department heads. Again, as part of this, you're authorizing your capital improvement program and also your 26-27 expenses for the capital improvement program. Again, the bulk of the capital improvement program is in our utilities, water and sewer, quite a bit of traffic or streets programs, and a very small impact to the general fund. And again, by category, sewer, water, quite a bit of pavement and some other smaller programs throughout the enterprise or throughout the city. So the total budget is just under a half billion dollars, 499 and a half million dollars. When we add in some of our other outside funds that you'll authorize separately, we're at just over a half billion, 504 million. And then the CIP budget, 264 million. So we wanted to give an update on this year and kind of an added item in the resolution we'll talk about on the following slides. So again, as we were doing our 26-27 budget at the same time, we're doing a deep analysis on this year as many items grow and we need to have a good starting point to project into the future year. So we found that there were some needs to make some additional changes pretty significantly, so to the tune of about $8 million. And so when we compare to what we had presented to March, to the CBFC in March, we are projecting revenue to be about 2.3 million lower than we were projecting at that time. We identified that salary and benefits are actually higher by another $10 million. And again, we've planned for that. We're offsetting by increasing transfers from other funds and still having funds available for those transfers that are planned for next fiscal year. And so we do plan, we will have this in balance, but there are still some areas of risk, especially in those revenue areas, property tax, sales tax, real property transfer tax. And so we're asking for authorization to just bring this budget into balance with the cost controls that we've been using and make adjustments as needed to do that. So just to help understand what the resolution is, there's four resolutions here. The primary one is asking, is authorizing the appropriation of expenses, and those are in exhibit A to the resolution. Making transfers, which are listed in exhibit B. Appropriate monies from grants, gifts, or donations once that grant application is approved by council. Increasing or making payments when directed external funding sources are identified. This just saves some time, especially for some smaller unbudgeted projects, maybe developer projects or partnerships with HARD, that type of thing. Authorize a city manager to execute contracts that are less than $100,000 for budgeted items. That's a typical item. Authorizations associated with insurance and risk management. Again, that's a typical item for us. Authorized actions related to GASB 31, which is our mark to market for the city's investments so it affects our budget expenses. They'll make some budgetary adjustments after the year-end close. The personnel actions that we described around modifying position control or vacancies. And then for this fiscal year only, authorize the city manager to reduce expenditure appropriations, increase appropriations, modify transfers such that the budget is balanced and revenues including transfers exceed or equal budget appropriations, including the transfer of the Russell City Redress Fund. So just wanted to make sure that those resolutions were well understood. And then your separate resolutions as your separate governing bodies, as a governing board, as assessor agency, the housing agency board of directors, and then also to approve the capital improvement program and then appropriate funds for 26-27. Beyond those resolutions, we're working on a number of future steps. So again, you'll hear later this evening, the business license tax modernization ballot measure. We'll be notifying streaming providers of their requirement to pay utility users tax. That should be already started or coming up in the next few days. working through opportunities with data centers and revenues associated with that. Still researching other revenue opportunities, big and small, and any other structural cost savings we can identify. In terms of reporting, we plan on a budget year-end report for 25-26. That will become a normal, just most important this year because the numbers have changed a lot throughout the year. I neglected to add that around December, we've talked about an update, for example, after the elections to see how things are going. Ongoing monthly reporting, and these are all available to the public through the Council Budget Finance Committee and posted on the city's website. We'll be looking at cash and fund balances for all funds, probably through the Council Budget and Finance Committee. We'll be looking at longer term planning for Measure C and revisiting the budget and financial policies that we've started with with Council Budget and Finance Committee. So we're asking council to conduct a public hearing and then adopt those proposed resolutions. And I think that's it. I'm here to take your questions. Thank you. Comments.

Okay. I will first start up here on the dais. This is a public hearing and Council Member Bonilla.

Thank you, Mayor. I just have two quick questions. Thank you so much for going through all of this. What is the GASB 31? And then can you also, I think you kind of said something about the redress fund. Can you kind of go back to that and just maybe share a little bit more about how that's being authorized tonight too?

Sure, Gatsby 31 is basically one of our accounting transactions that takes place after the year-end closes, and they also call it kind of a mark-to-market. So, for example, we have a number of investments, and what will happen is, while there's no really cash changing hands, we'll reflect either our revenue, if our investments are above what we purchased them for, or a decrease if they're below that purchase price. So because that adjusts revenue and expenses, we seek council authorization so that there's clarity about what's happening in that changed item. And GASB is the Government Accounting Standards Board, which provides kind of guidelines for how government should report their operations and their financial statements.

So is it mainly like an administrative step that's associated with sort of this budget proceeding?

Yeah, and it's every year. It's something that's there every year. And again, a reason I added that slide was just to help people understand what those pieces are so it's not just buried as number 10 in the resolution. So it's a standard annual thing that takes place. but because it affects the expenses, it could cause us to go over. Again, in this year, we've asked for that authorization, but in next year, we have not asked for that authorization, so it gives us that authorization specific to that item, to that GASB 31 pronouncement.

Got it, thank you.

The Russell City item was adopted a few months ago, the agreement with our partners for the Russell City Rejust Fund, And included in the updates of the 2025-26 budget, we had included funding for that. But we just wanted to be sure that there was some clarity for the public around that.

Got it. So does this authorize the, I guess, dispensement of those funds now?

It was previously included, but we just felt for transparency that the public might want to have that addressed in a resolution.

Got it.

Thank you. Council Member Roach.

Thank you. I don't know why I have a frog in my throat tonight. So I wanted to ask about a couple things. Where are we now on the dispensary income? Because there's two that are currently approved. What is our projections now, given that there's so much uncertainty about both of them?

so those have trended down we have reduced the the projection for the current dispensary i think it was down a couple hundred thousand dollars we have not made any projections towards the new dispensary as our understanding is that project is delayed okay and we understand there's a proposal to prepay but we wouldn't actually recognize that revenue until it's due to the city so even if that had taken place there wouldn't be a change in the budget okay so you've already counted for that in this projection now given the uncertainty okay great

And then I think you already said it, but I want to make sure we do sort of like an actual check-in November, December, you know, that time frame. You know, you're right, we'll know about the election. But just also to know, you know, just given in the last few months we had a, what was it, a $10 million swing in our compensation because there was an unforeseen, I think it was, I don't know, special assignment pays or whatever it is. So I want to make sure that any surprises are pretty clear to us before the end of the year.

Yes, that is absolutely the plan. So they will go both through council budget finance, if they're larger than that, then we'll bring them here as well.

Okay, and then the last thing is obviously we got into trouble because we had some bad past practices. I'm so thrilled about our new team that is uncovering them and marching forward in a different way, but I just wanted to ask about a few of them to make sure that we've really taken care of it. And the first one is unbudgeted overtime. Is that sort of a practice going forward? I know we've done that now for these next two cycles, but is that now a sort of guaranteed baked-in process that we will be really careful about tracking our actuals versus our budget item for overtime?

Yes, and in the monthly Council Budget Finance Committee report that is also emailed out to each of you, we do see over time, we've seen it come down, I think almost to about a quarter. It's a huge, huge change. Thank you to the chiefs for all their work on that over time. So when we budgeted this year for overtime, we worked very closely with them. They made projections. There could still be some minor swings in overtime if there's extra vacancies that weren't planned for. People have to work shifts, mutual aid calls. Typically, those are reimbursed. But we do, our chiefs, who are the primary source of overtime, do expect to stay within those budgeted numbers.

Yeah, great, because my problem was never the actual overtime. It seems like that is the way of things, especially when it comes to public safety, but other departments as well. You don't know what's going to happen, and overtime is a necessity. It was the unbudgeted overtime that was the big mistake, and I just want to make sure that that's the part that...

Yeah, the numbers were really unrealistic. Yes.

Okay, thank you. And then the other thing was, you know, it seemed like we probably had overinflated sales tax revenue, and I just want to be assured that we're, I think we are now taking a more sort of middle of the road to slightly conservative on the sales tax revenue. I know, like, for example, the swing of the BART car revenue, like being there one day and then not being there the next fiscal cycle. So just what is your new philosophy as our new finance director on projections of sales tax revenue?

So for this year, and I think next year as well, we did use a more optimistic projection from the consultant. The consultant gives us a pessimistic, most likely, and an optimistic. They're not off by a lot. I think our bigger concerns were in, for example, the real property transfer tax. There were a lot of smaller revenue items, such as in our fees and charges, where there were large numbers budgeted, but the actuals didn't even come close. We really took a look line by line through our revenues to thin those down. So those probably were the larger areas. We will be moving towards the more conservative projection, but we're also trying to balance getting into the likelihood. So we're still not sure we're at the end of the barcars. We're pretty sure we have not yet received our third quarter report. We should have received that pretty soon. which will be the end of March. Everything comes in a couple months behind. So that does make those projections, you know, they're always imperfect. The projections are what they are. But we are right now for 26 using a more optimistic projection.

Okay, yeah, great. As long as we're not using them to sort of dial it up to get to a balanced budget, right, and then not be looking at our actuals. Thank you. And then the other one is unbudgeted pilot programs like the HART program that kind of lived in between budget items. And I think I want to make sure that whatever pilot project, I mean, I don't know that we're going to be doing any new pilot projects for a while, at least none that come out of the general fund, but where we are with that, that how is that showing up now in a line item? For example, the part of the HART program that is continuing.

So those are just typically within each department's budget. So to the extent that they may be able to absorb programs, they can build them in. The ongoing piece typically is associated with staffing that does require some further discussions. And that's where this vacancy management may come into play as vacancies come up. Those are the types of questions that will be asked. Are there programs that can be adjusted, moving people around? maybe extra vacancies if needed. So those are when those typical opportunities come up. So the greatest cost for us is salary and benefits. So a pilot program that's a cost of a service of supply or a contract may not be at this level because it's within the department's authorized appropriations, maybe for a contract. But once we get into the position where we're looking at staffing and that type of thing, city managers, of course, involved, and likely there's enough of a budget adjustment that we are speaking to you about it.

Yeah, because my concern is I think what happened in the past was it was just made up of salary savings because that was available, but it wasn't actually being accounted for, and then that was the reason why it sort of lived somewhere off the books, and then when we were trying to make decisions, you know, future decisions, that number wasn't showing up because the salary savings, I think, got counted all over the place. So thank you, though. It sounds like, you know, we've cut. Go ahead.

I just want to clarify, so those are all baked into the base departmental budgets. Okay.

So they're not off record anywhere, and they're all just baked into the budgets now. Okay, thank you. And then I just, I promise, I just have two more of you guys, so I'll be quickly, and then I'll move on. The other one is, so, you know, the swing that we had, the $10 million swing, that was unbudgeted special assignment pays, and was it vacations and things? I just want to know where that now is being taken care of so that will not be a future surprise.

So each department in their budget, again, primarily public safety, has line items for those specific areas.

But they didn't, though. I thought that's why this ended up being a surprise. They do now. Okay, thank you.

So for 26, we've struggled to figure out what that number is, but we worked again closely with the department. They made some good estimates. Again, a lot of work on the part of analysts to figure this out, identify who may be retiring. That's when those big payments happen. of course, they're all projections, but we do expect to live within those projections.

Okay, thank you. And did you want to add to that?

I just want to say there were, it wasn't just about special pays, but it was also when we had that huge change in vacancies, there was also unfunded actuarial liability that we weren't budgeting quite right. So needing to make sure we also calculate that because that continues and we continue to pay that even though we have the vacancies. So just making sure we're estimating those items as well. Okay. And those are all now baked into our baseline salary and benefits.

Great, thank you. I mean, I just appreciate it. I know this is all really difficult work, and I just appreciate it. And then the last one is that, I mean, it sounds like we had, either it wasn't projected or we had an unforeseen increase in CalPERS to the tune of, I think, $6 million in one year. And so how do we avoid that pitfall as well because that again was unprojected and so it was another kind of surprise and how do we avoid that? Like should that have been caught and are you now unaware of that? How will that sort of not surprise us also in the future?

That's always been projected. That's been a known. So each year, CalPERS sends us a notice of what our unfunded actuarial liability is. And it projects out the next few years, but we'll get a new one the next year. So for the general fund for this year, that was known as we started building our projections out for this year. And I think it's around August that we get the new update. So that will always happen. There's not a way to change it. It's really kind of a backward look at what's happened. So it's not even things within our control. It's, for example, if CalPERS doesn't hit the interest rates that they're projecting, we'll have a higher unfunded actuarial liability. City Manager Ott referenced That's a fixed number, so if we're budgeted as a percent of someone's salary and then that someone isn't there, then we're not hitting it from our actuals. We're making some accounting adjustments to do that differently, to actually take a fixed amount out so the departments can better project how they're doing during the year. So there's a lot of those types of adjustments we're doing to just have better visibility for the departments, including helping the analysts understand their impacts.

Yeah, because it sounds like in the last round of contract negotiations, we did not do that properly. And I think that's why it was a bit of a swing. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe that number just stood out in my head. But I appreciate it because it sounds like you're contemplating that. And I appreciate you answering all my questions. I'm just really glad we have a new team in place that is really taking a hard look at this and you understand how to move forward with this. So we don't end up here again. Thank you. And I'll save the rest for my comments.

Thank you. Council Member Sermonio.

Thank you, Mayor, and thank you very much for a good report. Just one quick question. The status of the third approved dispensary?

I'm happy to jump in. There's currently, there's a CEQA lawsuit against the dispensary from the neighbors and a neighboring dispensary.

The third one, then.

The one that was approved by the council?

No, we approved the third one over in the... Oh, okay. Yeah.

I'm actually not sure of the latest.

Yeah, the second one.

We haven't received updates from the business.

Is that correct? Yeah. Okay. And Cookies is doing well?

Revenue from Cookies has declined, so we've reduced our projection associated with cannabis tax.

So they're still doing a good contribution.

There is still a good contribution, just lower than in the past.

Okay, thank you very much.

Thank you. Councilor Andrews.

Thank you. Thank you to all the staff involved in creating the budget so far. I really appreciate all the hard work, and thank you to our labor partners, including IFPT, Public Safety, everyone, anyone, everyone who was involved. I wanted to know about overtime unbudgeted, and I know that we are really doing a great job in tracking the overtime budget, but I am concerned about some of our new partners and addressing some of the needs in our community and the services that are required with them, Wanted to make sure that we're projecting if they are in progress in getting the support staff they need to address issues with those services, how is that impacting our public safety budget?

Are you speaking about Regis Village in particular?

I am, but they don't have to be the only ones. But I'm really concerned about us really looking at overtime as a concern when we're having the services in our community that may require public safety services and overtime, and we do need to budget effectively for it. Where does that funding come from if they're not appropriately staffed and they're impacting our public safety? Yeah.

I'll go ahead and make sure, and the fire chief can correct me if I get this wrong, but one of the ways that we see this occur, like the Regis Village where you're having a spike in some of the calls for service is actually an issue with response time more than anything, or at least redundancy and kind of pushing capacity where you're having so many calls for service, especially in District 1, and so that you're seeing firefighters getting tied up on some of those calls and then not being able to go to other calls as quickly. So I'll leave it to the fire chief, but my understanding is that it's not necessarily impacting overtime, it's just impacting kind of the risk and our capacity so that if there are redundant calls and calls occurring at the same time, then we're getting stretched and with the potential to increase response time. Is that? I didn't get it quite right, so. Okay, thank you.

Yeah, that's accurate. We don't have a direct correlation with increase in overtime. However, one of the engines that we do currently have shut down to save in our overtime was the engine that was helping with the high call volume in District 1. So it is a trade-off.

Okay, so support from our state or county supervisors should help us if we wanted to get that engine back to support the services.

they put in that District 1, we should be asking them specifically for that engine in order to support the... Yeah, we put that engine in place because of the increasing call volume that we are seeing in District 1, and one of the side effects of reducing overtime and reducing that engine staffing is longer call time delays in District 1, which exceeds the volume of the single engine we have there right now.

okay so okay so we will be talking to our county supervisors and our state representatives and the governor's office on trying to get our engine back to reduce the impact to our residents because of this new facility in district one there's a number of different approaches one is actually there's a federal grant that we're looking at potentially trying to um offset some of the cost of that engine

So we're sort of looking at that carefully. Also with regard to specifically a high call volume user like Regis Village, at least right now, there's a couple things we can either try to increase some of the payments to pay for some of our public safety services or try to get funding to reduce those call volumes so there's less of an impact. So right now we're actually taking that approach of saying, Can you provide additional services? Can you provide additional ways so that we actually see less of an impact on police and fire services? If that doesn't work, and at the same time, we could still be trying to look for funding to offset some of those impacts.

Okay. All right. Thank you. And then are we budgeting conservatively for streaming services? Kind of similar to cannabis, a lot of folks are changing their habits given the economy and just want to make sure that we're not relying too much on streaming services for our revenues.

For this budget, 26-27, we did not budget the streaming services. We wanted to see a little bit of how it performed. Okay. That said, it'll also get offset a little bit by, again, that behavior change of cutting the cord. Okay. So we did see a significant drop in projected revenue for utility users tax, mostly associated with use of cable. And so we did not increase to address streaming.

Okay, great. Thank you. And then another question I have is just a general rubric. Do we have a rubric of understanding the impacts to our budget if we start a new project or program? Is there some kind of questionnaire or something we can create to say, is this cost saving, is this neutral, or is this gonna be an impact to the budget? Is it gonna increase staff? Do we have something that we're regularly checking? Because right now we're all, you know, tightening our, you know, our belts right now, but we can get excited again if, you know, whatever's in the news or whatever we're excited about and we want to implement something, how are we going to be our, you know, I guess just be more conservative moving forward on that.

Yeah, I mean, that's something, I mean, any department head that brings a new program or project, it's the first thing that I ask them about is how that's going to be funded, what kind of impact it'll, and whether or not that funding's sustainable. And then those, you know, the finance director participates in those conversations as well. And then every staff report have financial impact where we disclose those impacts. I mean, there may be some good reason that the council decides to adopt a one-time program with one-time funding. I don't know at this point how we would recommend that, but if we did, we would disclose that and that would be, we would do that transparently so that you could make that decision or not. But those, I can assure you that every project and program that we talk about now, those are the first questions that we're asking.

Okay, thank you. I would ask the programs we're looking at now are more either revenue-based or creating savings on another side. So that's our focus right now is looking at programs where we can create opportunities for revenue or reducing expenses somewhere else.

Okay, yes. Just another note, or that we know that we can terminate a contract or, you know, so that if to the extent we think we have a sustainable source and we don't, that we have the flexibility to terminate that program or phase it out so that you have more flexibility contractually to manage your budget. Okay, great. Thanks.

Thank you. I don't see... Any more council questions? So I will chime in with a couple questions. And either one of you two can answer it. If not, the chief of police can answer this. I know that there is, when it comes to managing vacancies, there's a sort of a different sort of model of managing vacancies in the police department, particularly when there's ongoing recruitment and and folks that are in the academy. Can you give us sort of an explanation of what that looks like and sort of, it's been explained to us before, but I just want for the sake of the public, what does managing vacancies look like in the police department today?

Sure, in general, and the chief can kind of assist me if he needs to, but in general, hiring, for example, a trainee, there's about a six-month lead time. So we're in a constant motion of hiring. We work closely with them to help them understand where those savings may come up. So, for example, if there's a retirement, we've now budgeted for the cost of that person retiring that leave separation. That was typically a huge cost. And so then that salary savings is really available to go towards a trainee or two. Trainees are much less expensive than, for example, a retiring officer who's got a number of years of service. So they're watching, they may see, for example, they might, if they got all the trainees that they were hoping to get, they might look a little over budget at the middle of the year, and then they would just slow that down to be able to close out within their budget. and they are providing us with incredible regular reports right now to watch towards their end of year spending, so we expect that to continue into next year when they have even better information to start with.

So, okay, thank you for that. But let me ask it again, and this could be a different question. So I wanna be clear, I understand what you said, but I also wanna be clear about, are there cuts or will there be reductions in the police force in this budget?

There's no reductions in actual staff at this time. The positions that were removed are currently vacant. So they basically left themselves without kind of room to hire, but there's no new added vacancies. So we had a point in time where we looked at what was vacant and those positions were unbudgeted and moved into a list of positions to manage in terms of vacancies.

And there's constant recruitment and, you know, and there's also officers in the academy that will, when there are vacancies, they're plugged right back in there.

Why don't we have the police chief come and talk a little bit about how we manage it? It is a very, it's our most complex department in terms of hiring.

And the reason why I'm asking the question is primarily, and I'll give you sort of the general sort of mood, and maybe you can adjust your response to this. The general mood is that the police department is reducing police officers or they're reducing police officers through the process of restricting overtime or managing overtime. What I'm trying to do is I want to be precise and clear to the community as to how we are operating police officers how we're managed you know how we're continuing recruitment and putting officers in the Academy and then while simultaneously managing overtime all right that's a lot address all of that and if I leave something out yeah we ask it please so to the city managers point it is very complex we are working with a fixed number of positions that are available

to stay filled and to be filled if they become vacant going into the fiscal year. You saw a slide in the presentation about positions that are being held vacant. It was 80-something and I think 40 and some change are from the police department. So there is an impact. In addition to that, we constantly deal with about 30-ish positions in the department that at any given time are unavailable from a deployment standpoint, right? So these are people who are off on injury, in training, often FMLA, various leaves, et cetera. So we are constantly in a state of taking that information literally daily and readjusting how we deploy people using what we know is coming from a staffing perspective and data. When it comes to hiring, yes, we are continuing to hire specifically for police officer positions and dispatch positions because there are shortages there. um the point has been made uh that there are differences in the way that we recruit in the police department in terms of the requirements to even get hired right you're talking about from time of application to time a job offer could it be anywhere from uh depending on the complexity of the background and all the things that we have to do four to six months upon data hire there's a six-month police academy and then a field training program that takes you out to about a year So if we are in a position where we are only bringing on a person once a vacancy is created, the number of people who are not serviceable, that gap is gonna grow. And I think, I know that the city manager and the finance team are committed to making sure to the point that the finance director made, is that we are, in essence, kind of bringing people into the organization early to start that process to reduce that gap. It literally requires weekly management of where we are from an actual standpoint with payroll, with overtime. The credit to the POA and to our other city partners who helped make this happen, but with the schedule adjustment, You know, we've been able to completely eliminate patrol mandatory overtime. Operational overtime happens, you know, and that's not going to change, but we've seen significant reductions there. Those guardrails are going to remain. And then again, we know what our number is going into the fiscal year. We have the flexibility to manage within that to make sure that, A, we're staying within budget, and B, we're meeting needs of the community. So there could be opportunities for overtime on a case by case basis, depending on need and available budget. But that's going to be literally the daily work as we work through this fiscal year, and I hope I hope that covered everything you asked me about. Okay. Yes, it did.

I think it... And may I just, because at the underlying, I think your comments are about the level of service and being able to provide service, you know, a high level of service. And I just want to commend the police department because we have over the last year seen a over double digit reduction in crime. And then especially given, I mean, of course, the work of the team and the officers, but also the use of technology. And we'll also be proposing at the next council meeting some additional technology that we think will help maintain that high level of service that the HPD is already providing.

Absolutely. Yes, absolutely. Okay, appreciate that. Mayor Pro Tem Syrup.

Thank you, just a brief question. During the CIP budget presentation last time, there was a brief conversation about making sure that software and equipment items will be moved out of the CIP budget into the appropriate departments just to have better transparency in tracking. I was wondering if you might be able to help time box that so it's not just a wish that happens at some point, but more so a goal we can set for ourselves.

Yes, we have collectively decided, next budget, fiscal year 28. Great, I love a definitive answer. This budget, as you heard from Director Hillbrands, there was a lot going on, and we were trying to balance two budgets at the same time, so making kind of fundamental changes to that, we just didn't want to do at this stage, but fiscal year 28, we're gonna make those changes.

Great, thank you for the definitive answer, and I'll save my praise for my comments, thank you.

And the Public Works Director, I think in the municipal government lexicon, that means yes. Perfect, okay, I will close this portion and go on to public comment. We do have one public commenter and it's Zoom user.

Hi, I'm Suzanne Luther with Hayward Concerned Citizens and I attended last month's budget and finance committee meeting and I think I heard, correct me if I'm wrong, I think I heard Mayor Salinas say something like that since you use most of Measure C funds for what you were supposed to use it for, that the 30 million balance of Measure C that you are using to balance the budget is basically gravy. And he didn't, use those exact terms. But I feel that you shouldn't think of those funds so willy-nilly. Your citizens voted for this, and you should bake that out of the money and plan to honestly and diligently repay that money, because it would go a long ways to help build the safety building, which I call Hayward Police Department building. It would help bring that to fruition, since that has been pushed back and push back and push back over the years. And I really think that you guys should put that money where your voters wanted you to put your money, that money. Thank you.

Thank you. I don't see any other public comment. I will close public comment. Oh, hold on a second. I think I see, I will open public comment to TJ.

Hi, thank you. This is TJ with Hayward Concerned Citizens and listening to this budget discussion tonight gives me some renewed heartburn and frustration. And as a resident, this is what I see that I want to share. I feel like with consultants, you mentioned not that long ago about cutting them back, but it seems like every other item for discussion mentions a consultant. And then you're covering ideas like the loop that you can't even afford right now, rather than just focusing on the matter at hand. Your conference room renovation for your acoustics at City Hall, that's one great example. Your priorities seem... still skewed to me. And you're building more bike lanes when you have residents on social media complaining about response times being diminished because of your cuts and complaining about that. And then street vendors that have no code enforcement, still that problem. You know, you took away Kirby, Moby, you made a library worker cry. You know, those things stand out in my mind, the very human, you know, costs of all that has happened in the last several months. You took our Measure C funds, as my colleague mentioned, to help balance your budget. But you're still, you know, doing this restitution for an injustice to Russell City residents that Hayward bears no direct responsibility for. And Mayor Salinas, you know, you say during the pandemic, you responded to what residents asked for, but you focus on the demands of small groups rather than the majority and what they need. And then I also have a dream of a city that doesn't place the burden of getting out of its debts on the backs of its taxpayers. We all have to learn to live within our means. And I just hope going forward that you remember that. Thank you.

Thank you. So I will now close public comment, and I will go to Mayor Pro Tem Syrup.

Thank you, Mayor. I'm happy to move the item. I'll just do that now, if you're okay with that. And I just wanted to express my gratitude for the work that's gone into putting together this budget, especially to your team. Small but mighty, I didn't have a lot of questions because I brought most of them up during the Budget and Finance Committee meeting. I want to acknowledge my colleagues, Mayor Salinas and Councilmember Bonilla for serving on that committee with me. I think we've done a lot of work over the past year to make sure that it's serving its purpose and function for the city. And I just really appreciate finance staff helping us make that a reality where we're tracking budgets to actuals on a regular basis, as well as my colleagues up here who really pushed for a higher level of standards and quality in that committee. So just wanted to express that gratitude. And then our labor partners, we would not be in a position right now where we were able to adopt a balanced budget had our labor partners not come to the table and negotiated concessions with us. So this was really a team effort. And I also just want to thank our executive team, many of whom are here tonight. We had to go on a, we just experienced a crash course in public finance that nobody wishes to go through or experience, but I think we've come out stronger for it. I think as a city, we're more fiscally disciplined. I think we have a better handle on our budget and how we leverage our budget to deliver high quality services while staying within our means. And this budget is a first step in a long journey. We are in the process of stabilizing, but we still have more to do. We're not out of the woods yet. And so I'm looking forward to our continued collaboration from our E team all the way down to our workers and our labor partners to get through these woods. I'm happy to move the item just because we've put a significant amount of work into getting to this point, and I'm optimistic that in the coming years we are going to continue to find our way towards shrinking this and eventually emerging out of this and rebuilding our deficit. I definitely share some of the caller's concerns around us tapping into Measure C, and I think later on in this agenda we're going to talk about the Hayward Business License Tax. We are constantly exploring revenue measures, not just for this election cycle, but I've also discussed with my colleagues that we should look at revenue measures going into the future. What other dollars have we left on the table? What other measures and ordinances are outdated? I think it's really an opportunity for us to get creative and get through this together. So I feel really positively about where we are. in light of where we were a year ago. I don't quite see the light at the end of the tunnel, but I know that we're going closer to it, and that's a good feeling. So with that, I'll end my comments, but I really appreciate all the hard work that's gone into this, and thank you to your team and to everyone here for making this a reality. Thank you, Councilmember Bonillo.

Thank you, Mayor. I also wanted to say thank you to our director of finance and to all of the leadership of the city, all of our staff that came to the table, as well as our city manager and our assistant city manager for your leadership throughout this process. I also want to acknowledge our unions. I think that throughout this process, we've really demonstrated a strong partnership to move us forward and to make sure that we're still able to preserve the services that our city provides that are enabled through our city workers. So really appreciate that partnership. I also just want to acknowledge that we still, although this budget is balanced, we still have a $30 million structural issue that we need to solve. you know continue to move forward at looking at ways of solving that i just appreciate you know my colleagues you know focus as well as the staff's focus on making sure that you know we're we're looking at how we increase our revenue but we're also staying very very disciplined on our spending on our hiring and on all of our financial practices including overtime As was mentioned by the finance director, at the finance and budget committee meetings, every single month, we're finally seeing actuals to budget. And that's really, really important. And we're seeing it on a monthly basis, almost in real time. And we're able to make the adjustments that we need to make to ensure that the city's financial trajectory remains stable. So I know that, you know, we we heard from one of my colleagues around sort of this $10 million swing in terms of special pays and payroll cycles. And I was initially concerned about that as well. Still am. But what I think more excited about and appreciative of is how quickly we were able to catch that and then go and rebudget to make sure that this wasn't going to end up in a bigger issue later down the road, like perhaps some of our weak budgeting practices in the past have led us to. Because this $10 million could have snowballed, and then we would have never seen it until we had to go through and chew through a reserve that we don't have. Because that's kind of what happened here. I think that we all thought we had a reserve, and then that reserve got eaten through or spent, and then we found out at the end that because of all of these changes, we now had to use our reserve, and now we have no more cash balance. I just appreciate how we're so detailed in managing the budget now in a way that I haven't seen before. So just really want to recognize all of the hard work that goes into that and the transparency that we're now showing across all of the budget line items and across all of our departments. And I know our work here isn't done because one of the things that the director of finance had mentioned is there's a whole bunch of policies that we need to go through and we need to codify from a finance perspective. We started that conversation, but now we need to kind of go back and see that through. And I think that those policies are gonna give us the guardrails to prevent us from getting into the situation that brought us here today you know um so really look forward to you know those those policy discussions um you know understanding very you know purposefully how we're gonna you know kind of continue to rebuild the reserve and i think that those conversations are already underway but you know very excited to see that and then i know that city services have been impacted generally but you know just a plug for the library right anything we can do and i know that we've seen some numbers for what it would take to restore library services. But I think that the libraries are such a critical part of where our communities have access to information and to connection and to resources. So as we go through future budget cycles and as we look for grants and other opportunities for funding, just like I've seen other departments get creative, I'm really looking forward to seeing what we're going to do with the library. but outside of that just wanted to thank my colleagues uh the mayor and council member cyrup on the finance committee and just really appreciate um all of the transparency that that we're now seeing and also continue to be interested in reviewing the cash balances across all of our funds just continue to drive that high level of transparency um across this work in particular so uh very excited to kind of you know explore future revenue measures like we're going to be doing tonight but also just really kind of keeping the pressure on cost containment i think is going to be really important too so at the end of the day just very pleased with where we're at and just wanted to give a special thanks to everyone who got us here thank you uh counselor wrote

Thank you. Yeah, of course I wanna thank our leadership, our city manager Ott, assistant city manager Thomas, and Director Hildebrandt and your staff for all the hard work that it took to get here to budget not one, but two fiscal budgets in a really short period of time. And just based on my early questions, I just really understand, really am pleased with what you've done to understand the troubling past practices that got us here. And I do feel confident moving forward that we have, new policies in place that you know what to look for, where the troubling issues may be, and to make sure you're keeping a close eye on the budget. I also want to emphasize that we could not have gotten here without our labor partners coming to the table and making concessions. It was not an easy ask. A lot of work had to go into getting your members on board. So I want to thank all the employees, all the labor leadership that worked so hard to get everybody to the table. It just wasn't an easy task, including leadership that was part of the negotiations. I think this was a really tough thing for any city to have to go through. And I just can't thank everyone enough for getting us here, because we wouldn't be calling this a balanced budget if that part didn't happen. And while we had to make really tough decisions, we lost staff. That was the most painful thing that happened in this process. I mean, that was something none of us wanted to do. I think losing your coworkers, losing extra help in your departments, all of that is sort of particularly troubling to go through, and it's gonna take time, I think, to sort of move on from that you know to rebuild the morale that hit that that had to take especially in the library um and i i just hope going forward that you know and i do have confidence we'll have we'll be able to recover from that but it will take time um and then and i do i do have confidence in our team for doing this this solid work um to you know again understand what happened in the past and move us forward so thanks everyone for everything you've done and um and just hang in there with us right we're all going to keep moving forward And then as you can see, we're continuing to rely on one-time solutions, and we need to wean ourselves off of those one-time solutions as soon as possible. so you know we have to keep acting with absolute scrutiny make sure like every expenditure gets gets an eye and whether it's necessary we we're going to have to as council be really disciplined in anything we're recommending um including the staffing and the position controls the overtime all of that um you know because we don't we we're still in it as um council member bonilla pointed out this is still a structural deficit even though we're on a balanced budget But I do have confidence in our team and our city manager odd in your team that will remain disciplined To keep those hatches battened down until we see clear skies ahead And with this budget though, I will you know, I am gonna accept the recommendation to pass the budget Because I think it's as disciplined as we can get at this point and we have to move forward and we're gonna keep a close eye I'll look forward to those actual updates later in the year and just thank everyone for getting us here. I

Thank you. Council Member Andrews.

Again, I wanna thank our labor partners for coming to the table and wanna thank the city staff who brought us to this point again. I just wanna read to the public measure C just because I'm hearing a lot of things, so I just wanna read for everyone. So from what I'm reading, to restore and maintain Hayward City services and facilities, including firefighting emergency medical services, improved police protection for neighborhoods, replacing the aging library with a 21st century facility, including safe space for after school homework and tutoring, repairing potholes in streets, updating aging neighborhood fire stations and other city services, shall the city of Hayward increase the sales tax by half percent for 20 years only, providing locally controlled funding that cannot be taken by the state. So I just want to acknowledge that this is the language from Measure C. And I also want to acknowledge our public safety partners as you are doing the work and you are fulfilling the promise of Measure C. I also want to thank our library staff, our development services, Public Works, everyone who has been coming to work every day fighting for our city and just want to let the public know that we are acknowledging what was promised in Measure C. So I just wanted to read the language for everyone. And speaking to that, even though we are going through this situation, we are looking at creative ways to look at our public safety building. If you go back and look at our previous infrastructure committee meetings, we are diligently looking at conceptual plans, ways to pay for a building, and I think even if we were to look at all of the budget years that we have had to set aside money for a public safety building, it would still be very difficult to do with the amount of money of revenue that we have and expenditures we have. It would be very, very difficult for us to do at one point of time. So just letting you know, we do have a plan. It's coming and you are more than welcome to participate in any of those public safety meetings or infrastructure meetings and contribute that way. I do want to give special acknowledgement to the library staff because I know that it's been a really tough year and I am hoping that we can work with our other local agencies as partners to make sure that we are keeping the promise of Measure C and making those that building a community asset continue to be a community asset but also acknowledge it is still a community asset it is still running it is still operating and it is still functional for our community and you are our public we would love for you to help us make the library even more successful by looking at ways how you can help the library how you can help children in your community at the library there are opportunities for you to also participate in making sure the library is successful so i just wanted to say that But again, I look forward to the policies that we're putting in place to make sure we are moving positively and efficiently moving forward. And I want to thank the Budget and Finance Committee. I think you all know that this is a very important committee. You all know what to look for now. Budget to actuals on a monthly basis. I would love to see that come to the full council on a quarterly basis, if that's possible. just to make sure we are all part of the Budget and Finance Committee. And that's all. Thank you.

Thank you. Council Member Sermonio.

Mayor, thank you. I certainly agree with my colleagues on all of their statements, et cetera, so I am only going to be thanking our family, Hayward family, especially our employees, because if it were not for them, we certainly would not be able to provide the services that our residents need. So I thank every one of our employees, my heartfelt thanks, and we still have some work to do, so let's keep working on it. Thank you, good report.

Thank you. So the item was moved by Mayor Pro Tem Syrup. It was seconded by Council Member Goldstein. Council Member Goldstein, did you wanna make a comment?

Well, thank you, yes. So I am in support, but I did remove my name as the seconder to give one of my colleagues on the Budget and Finance Committee an opportunity to second that motion. But I do wanna say how appreciative I am of the great changes that we've made throughout the city. the finance department really leading the way to stabilize a very, very difficult situation. And that stabilization would not have been possible without the cooperation of our executive team, our department heads, our city staff, and our labor partners. And so really just, you should know how much I appreciate pulling it all together so that we are today where we are today. We have more to go, but we are, here today where we need to be. Thank you.

So yes, so moved by Mayor Pro Tem Syrup, seconded by Council Member Bonilla, and I will certainly be supporting this measure. I do wanna make a couple of comments. I agree with my colleagues. We would not be in this place if it weren't for our labor partners. We would not be in this place if it weren't for our executive team. You know, they are all experts. They are content experts. They are technical experts. They know how to run their departments. They know how to manage personnel. And they did it. I know we have a great deal of confidence. I heard confidence up here. And I think that is one thing you have seen over the last few months. We do have a great deal of confidence in the team that we have. here today uh and you know last time i um i failed to say their names but uh miss hatfield miss mullins uh mr beasley um you guys are um mr barnes i said i said bees last time i said mr barnes i'm sorry um you guys have just done a phenomenal job. I mean, and Mr. Barnes, I think you even came, sort of you were, you know, you came to the Revenue Department, or actually this position, sort of recently, and so I wanted to, you know, you have certainly carried your weight, so I appreciate that. I think the theme that we have been working towards or the vision that we have been working towards, and I know I'm sure all of our labor groups are listening right now, the drumbeat we are pounding up here is structural and ongoing. structural and ongoing, and that is gonna be something that we will be talking about in the coming months and in the coming years. I did want to comment on what Councilmember Andrews just presented, and I appreciate you reading the text of Measure C. because I want to be clear about the intent of Measure C. It was a promise. It was. I knocked on a lot of doors and made that promise on doorsteps in this city. And so I know what it is and I know what it feels like to stand at a doorstep and make a promise to thousands of people, not just a couple, but to thousands of voters. And so I know the accountability that comes with making a promise to over 80,000 voters in the city of Hayward. And I think today, if you look at the promises that we've made and the promises that we've delivered, let me just mention some. and this is a topic for good or for ill, I'm just saying, but in the last, over the last several years, 80% of our budget was committed to public safety, 80%. So did we live up to a promise that I made on those doorsteps? Yes, that promise was made and it was delivered. And we have seen crime go down in double digits in some of the key areas that we measure for quality of life. The bread and butter of quality of life issues, crime goes down. So I wanna be very clear about that. Our roads, let's talk about roads. We went from a PCI from 68, to 78, 78. There's only two other cities in Alameda County that has better roads than us, Danville and Emeryville, right? Two other cities. We rank at the top of the county when it comes to road quality. We built a library, promise delivered. We built a park, promise delivered. We built a firehouse training center that is a regional hub for training some of the region's firefighters and EMTs. Built, delivered, and funded, delivered. And so, you know, so when we talk about Measure C, and by the way, you know, for a group that takes copious notes at every meeting that we go to that they attend to misquote me and to say that we, that to say that I, and I know they were paraphrasing, but to say that I made a reference that we're using measure C dollars as gravy, that's ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous. And the fact that they go to every meeting and write everything we say down tells me that they just lied to everyone in this city. Everybody. Given the results that we have been able to deliver. And so to sit there and to listen in and call in and say that to us is absolutely offensive and insulting. This council, I've said it before and I will say it again, this council has been the most transparent, and I've been up here with several councils, we have been the most transparent when it comes to this process. The most. And so, I typically do not respond to public comment, particularly callers who call in on Zoom. I typically don't comment. But to misquote me and to suggest a comment that I made in a budget and finance committee is absolutely horrendous. And they should retract that. With that said, I will close my comments and I will end on a positive note. Ms. Hillbrant, thank you very much for all of the work you've done. I wanted to thank my colleagues, Council Member Bonilla and Council Member Syrup, Mayor Pro Tem Syrup. This council has done a phenomenal job in getting this budget back on track. This council has done an outstanding job to make sure that this city's future, not only do we make promises, but we deliver everything we do and everything we say. With that, Madam City Clerk, you can take the roll. and it looks like the item passes unanimously. Congratulations, everybody.

And Mayor, can I, do you mind if I just say one thing? Yeah. I just wanna thank you and the council for your leadership as well, and this has been, I know I've only been here for the last five months, and it's been a, a hard road, and I know you've been living that longer, but thank you to all of you, and thank you, I know you've already said it, but if you don't mind if I could just echo some of what you've already said, but to thank Director Hillbrands, her team, all of the executive team, Assistant City Manager Thomas, this has been a huge team effort, I mean weekly, almost daily calls and meetings, and to our labor partners who came to the table, so thank you everybody as well.

Thank you for those comments. Okay. We move on to item number 21. which is the PH26-026. This is the GAN limit adoption, adopt a resolution establishing a GAN appropriations limit for fiscal year 2026 and 27. And this report is gonna come to us by way of our finance director, Director Hillbrands. I'm gonna forego staff report on this and I will come straight to council questions. And I DON'T HAVE ANY COUNCIL QUESTIONS, SO I WILL GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT. I DO NOT HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT CARDS, AND I DO NOT SEE ANYBODY ONLINE, SO I WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENTS, MADAM CITY CLERK, OR I NEED A MOTION IN A SECOND. OKAY, I HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE MOTIONED. NOW EVERYONE'S WITHDRAWING. I saw a lot of, I just saw a feature of this that I never saw before. Hold on a second. Yeah, I know, hold on, let me. Oh wait, hold on. Yeah, I see, okay. Moved by Councilmember Andrews, seconded by Councilmember Goldstein. Madam City Clerk, take the roll. And the item passes unanimously. Thank you. Okay. Moving on to item number 22, LB26-011, Hayward Business License Tax, adoption of resolutions. One, establishing November 3rd, 2026 as the date for an election on a proposed ballot measure seeking voter approval of an ordinance to modernize the City of Hayward Business License Tax. Two, requesting the Alameda County Board of Supervisors to consolidate said election with the state with the state general election, and three, establishing the policy for ballot arguments for the ballot measure, and finding that the actions are exempt from environmental review. And this report will come to us by way of our city manager, Madam City Manager?

I'm gonna turn, this is another effort that's been a great team effort with the City Attorney's Office, with the City Manager's Office, with the Finance Department, but we are gonna have Management Analyst Perez, who's online, go ahead and give this presentation. She's been working on this and project managing this. And then we also have our consultant that helped us throughout this, Matt Newman with Blue Sky, and then our city attorney's office has been crucial in this whole process, so we also have staff to answer questions about it. So I'll turn it over to Management Annalise Perez. Good evening, Mayor and Council.

Can you hear me?

Yep.

Okay, great. So tonight we're back with the updated business license tax modernization framework for your consideration and action. We've made some great progress since our last work session, and we're excited to walk you through where we've landed. Next slide, please. As you can see here, the timeline graphic's gonna walk you through how we got here starting in January, 2026, when council first directed staff to explore BLT modernization and compare with neighboring jurisdictions. And since then we've held multiple work sessions, we've conducted public opinion polling, we've engaged the business community, and we brought back additional regional comparisons and labor input as requested. And so tonight we're gonna be presenting that updated framework And we're going to be recommending approval for council consideration. Next slide, please. The proposal that we're going to be presenting to you today modernizes a tax structure that hasn't been changed since 1978. That's nearly 50 years ago. It introduces a progressive gross receipts framework, meaning that businesses with higher gross receipts pay a higher rate. And it's projected to generate approximately $16 million In annual revenue with roughly 12.3 million over what we currently generate and so based on some feedback from our Labor partners. We did add a new gross receipts bracket for those businesses that generate over $50 million in revenue and we did make some changes to rates to data centers landlords and some other rates and higher tax brackets. So you met him before at our last work session in April, but I will introduce him again, we have matt Newman from blue sky consulting and he's going to be walking you through the next slides.

Good man. Good evening, everybody. As soon as the next slide comes up, I'm happy to tell you about it. There it is. So this is the slide which shows the rates for the different sectors of the Hayward economy. It's similar to the structure that you all have seen a few times before. The main difference between what's shown here and what you looked at last time is this additional bracket for businesses with over $50 million in gross receipts. This is an effort to just say if you're a bigger part of the Hayward economy, maybe you should contribute more in tax revenue. So you can see the rates for 25 to 50 million are largely similar to the ones that were over 25 million before. But this additional over 50 million bracket has slightly higher rates for these larger businesses. The other change that's probably worth noting from what you saw last time is that the rates for all the rental categories, commercial, non-residential and residential properties have increased from $3 per thousand of gross receipts to 375 per thousand of gross receipts. And the outcome of these various changes is about $2 million more than we were projecting last time. So about 16 million compared to a little over 14 million last time. So that's what this looks like. The next slide shows how we will end up compared to other neighboring jurisdictions. So what this slide shows is tax revenue per thousand dollars of taxable sales. There's other ways you could do this. You could do it dollars per capita, but doing it per dollar of taxable sales or per thousand dollars of taxable sales Kind of puts it in the context of how big each city's economy is. So you can see way over on the left at about 96 cents per thousand dollars of taxable sales is where Hayward sits today. The green proposal closer to the middle at $3.66 is where we were on April 7th. And then after the adjustments that we just walked through, we're at about $4.06 per $1,000 of taxable sales. Now, notably where that puts us is right between two other proposals that are heading, we think, for the ballot in November, one in San Leandro and one in Newark. Of course, we don't know for sure what will happen in those cities, but based on staff reports from each of those cities, we know they're at least considering increases in their gross receipts tax. And so San Leandro's proposal, according to their city's estimates, would be about $3.96 per thousand dollars of taxable sales, just a little bit below where we will be if this passes and goes to the ballot. And Newark will be just a little bit above that based on the proposal that they were considering in April. Happy to answer questions about this at the end or now, but that's all I have.

Thank you, Matt. Next.

Perfect. Thank you. That slide.

So this slide shows the exact language that Hayward voters will see on the November ballot. Should you approve today's resolutions? We made a few changes from our last work session to reflect the new tax rates and estimated revenue. Next slide, please. So if council approves tonight, This is a timeline of next steps. So we move immediately into our public education work that will take place through September. And we'll be using digital and direct mail communication and educational content on our webpage. And then included in this timeline are also some legal deadlines, as well as the November 3rd, 2026 election date. And so if this measure passes, we're going to be returning to council in December for a budget work session to discuss the anticipated revenues. Next slide, please. So tonight, staff is recommending adoption of the resolutions before you, which includes establishing November 3rd as the election date, requesting that the Alameda County Board of Supervisors consolidate with the general election. We also request that you approve the ballot question and propose ordinance. And lastly, establishing the policy for filing ballot arguments and identifying and authorizing the council members to do so. So that's everything that we have for you tonight. And we're happy to answer any questions that you may have.

Thank you. Thank you. Let me come to council and see if there's any questions. Hold on a second. Mayor Pro Tem Syrup.

Thank you. Thank you for the presentation and for all the hard work that you've gone through to assemble this proposal. I really want to express gratitude for the speed at which research was done to look at neighboring cities and see what their proposed updated business license taxes were looking like, just to make sure that if we were going to do this, we were doing this right for the long term and not selling ourselves short by updating it and then being behind our neighbors upon adoption if our voters decide to approve this. I am curious, do we have some room in the description still, or have we used up every letter for the ballot description? And I ask because something that I felt was very strong in the Measure C language was the line, that cannot be taken by the state. And I think that resonates with a lot of people because folks, I think, feel maybe tired of paying taxes and then feeling like, oh, well, is this money even coming back to So I guess my question is, is there more room and could we add a line like that maybe after it says annually until repealed that cannot be taken by the state comma? I'm curious if folks have thoughts on that.

Yeah, we're looking around right now to see if we can, if we're trying to count in our head, I think, but I don't.

I believe the last time we counted, it was at 75 words, so.

Out of how many?

75. 75.

Okay. So we're right at the limit is what I'm hearing.

Yes.

Okay.

Go ahead, Chuck.

Yeah, I think we're actually at 73 maybe. Okay. Might be two words there, but... We've kind of parsed it down as best we can, and we think that, you know, we'd have to take something out if we added those.

Yeah, one, two, three, four, five, six. Yeah, it's a lot of words. Okay, well, thank you for clarifying. I just, for those that are tuning in and listening, I want folks to understand that cannot be taken by the state. It's a big part of this and why we're doing it. You know, last time we had a conversation about the business license tax, our partners at the chamber had asked around about the idea of a phased approach. And, you know, I have my feelings about why that may or may not work. I was wondering if staff can maybe explain why we're deciding to go about updating the business license tax versus trying to take a phased approach.

When you say phased approach, you mean having it kind of phase in over time?

Yes, because that was just a question that was brought up before, right? Yeah.

I mean, I'll start, and then Director Hillbrand, because her department managers can jump into, but I think one of the issues is kind of consistency and changing that. I mean, we have businesses that become accustomed to what that is and build it into their business models, and so changing it over time and having that not be predictable, even if we try to communicate that clearly with businesses, just we don't think is a best practice. I don't know if you have anything else you want to add.

I think that's the key issue. There will be a lot of communication outreach after this passes to help them understand the new model as it is, probably some resubmittals. So to do it again every year for whatever number of years I think would also be difficult for those businesses.

Understood. And then, I mean, I think there's also the deficit consideration as well. If we are phasing in, we're reducing the revenue we're bringing in, which means that we have to rely more on short-term solutions like Measure C and difficult conversations with labor partners. And so we're really trying to generate as much revenue as possible. Am I under the correct assumption?

Absolutely.

Okay. Okay, great. I think other than that, you know, those are my questions. Yeah, I'll save my comments for after public comment. Thank you.

Thank you. Council Member Roach.

Thank you, yeah, I think you actually answered my question, but should this get passed, should it be implemented, just so there are no surprises, we will plan on doing some sort of education campaign about when it will be implemented, should it pass, and what they can expect. Yes, we're actually meeting next week to start talking through what that education campaign will look like, but yes, there will be, the city will do an education campaign, a neutral education campaign. Okay, great, thank you, and then the rest, I just have comments after that, so thank you, thanks.

Thank you. I will now move to public comment. Let's see, let me go to public comment. I don't have any cards and let me see. I don't see any public comments. I will close public comment and then I will come back. Let me renew this, oops. Mayor Pro Tem Syrup.

Thank you. I'll be brief. Just it's nice to be at this point and similar to our conversation around the budget this was also a massive collaborative effort. I am really grateful for the input of our labor partners in helping us think through how we get out of this deficit. This business license tax to me is a testament to that partnership. We are trying to be solutions oriented and I hope that through this process, our employees and management see that we're trying to find the best solution that fits everyone's needs that we can get behind. We were sensitive to the business community. We really appreciate the Chamber's input throughout this process. We were sensitive to our labor partners, making sure that we weren't leaving money on the table. The turnaround from idea to having this before us tonight to actually vote on was fantastic. And so I just really want to thank you, City Manager Ott, for helping drive this forward as well. I'm happy to be supporting this item tonight. I've moved a bunch of items already, so I'll defer to one of my colleagues, but I will be supporting the item.

Thank you. It was moved by Councilmember Andrews. And Councilmember Andrews, you want to make a comment on the motion?

Yes, I just want to thank staff for bringing us to this point and really thank our labor partners, particularly SEIU for reminding us of the date of when the when we last passed a business license tax modernization. I also want to thank the executive team, and I know it was a lot of work to get to this point, and we still have a long journey to go, but just want to thank everyone who was involved in getting the language together, because it is not easy to wordsmith ballot measures. So thank you for that as well. Thanks.

Thank you. Council Member Bonilla.

Thank you, Mayor. I also just wanted to share my thanks to everyone who was involved in making this happen, including our union partners who really helped us think progressively about how this could be applied. So I appreciate the progressive nature of how we went about developing this business license tax modernization. as well as the thoughtful and balanced approach that I think this provides. Wanna also just acknowledge our business community and thank them for their contributions to the city as well because I know that this is money that's gonna be well spent in making sure that our businesses have a thriving environment that they could be successful in. excited that we got here so quickly and really pleased to see how we're taking structural and ongoing approaches to making sure that we're able to deal with our budget. And like council member Roche said, you know, really moving away from these one-time you know, fixes or band-aids and really looking at these more sustainable solutions. And I also appreciate Council Member Syrup, you know, by having, by him driving us to keep our eye on the ball for other opportunities to modernize the way that we collect money and tax and do other things across the city. So very pleased to be here and thanks so much for everyone's help getting us here today.

Thank you. Council Member Goldstein.

Yeah, thank you. This happened very, very quickly, but also very transparently. We did get a lot of input from our community. There were plenty of discussions. It, in fact, probably would not have risen to a level of visibility so quickly if we had not