City Council - Regular Meeting

Hey, hey, hey. Hey, hey, hey. Hey. Hey. Hey.

Heat. Heat.

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

Heat. Heat. It is now time to begin the special open session.   to hear public comments before close  session. Council member Brown here. Okay. Council member Jimenez presente.

Council member Zabeda here. Council member Wilson  here. Vice Mayor Robinson here. And Mayor Martinez   here. For the record, council member Bana  is absent for roll call. Our next item,   close session. And during close session, a  council will discuss the following items. Item   C1 is public employee performance evaluation title  city clerk. Our second item, item C2 is conference   with legal counsel anticipated litigation.  There are two cases and I believe the city   attorney would like to make an announcement.  Yeah, I uh would like to add an additional   um item under C2 to add to three cases today. Um  the city received um a letter from Secure Justice   um from Brian Hoffer regarding the flock item on  tonight's um open session agenda. And I'd like   to given that that it's a threat of litigation,  I'd like to have a discussion in close session   with the council about this um item. And I think  the mayor is prepared to make a motion to add it. Uh pursuant to government code section 54954.2 2 B staff is requesting that the council add  a close session item that arose after posting   of the agenda and requires immediate action.  The city received a litigation threat letter   on March 3rd after agenda posting and delay  would prejudice the city's interest. I will   entertain a motion to add the item. So may I  make a motion to add the item? Second. Okay.   So that was a motion by Mayor Martinez, second  by council member. No, actually the motion was  

made by uh Council Member Sepeda and seconded  by Brown. And Brown. Okay. And for the record,   Council Member Bana is present. Thank you.  Council member Brown, yes. Council member Bana,   yes. Council member Jimenez, yes. Council member  Wilson, yes. Vice Mayor Robinson, yes. Council   member Zapeda, yes. And Mayor Martinez, yes. The  vote is vote is unanimous. We have one inerson   speaker. If there's anyone joining us online that  would like to address the council during close   session before close session, please raise your  hand at this time. Speaker is Cordell Hendler. So,   good evening, uh, Mayor Martinez, Council,  for the record, I am Cordell Hendler. I'm a   Richmond resident. So, the city clerk has done  an outstanding job. when you go back in there,   I want you to appreciate I really mean I really  want you to appreciate all the hard work that   she and her her team has done to prepare for  all of these agendas and does the minutes. So,   I want you to think about that. So, when you  go back in there, I want you to acknowledge   all the hard work and dedication that the city  clerk has done. And I'll leave it at that. That   was our only speaker. Then uh uh public forum is  closed and we will now retire to closed session.

Please hold while I try to connect you. Give me a

Heat Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat. N.

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

Hey, hey, hey.

Heat. Heat. Hey, hey, hey.

Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.

Heat. Hey. Hey.

Heat. Heat.

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

Heat. Heat. Huh? Huh? Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat.

down down down down. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.

Hallelujah.

Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.

is uh it's now time to start the regular meeting  of the Richmond Housing Authority. authority. So,   um we'll start with the pledge of allegiance. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United  States of America and to the republic   for which it stands, one nation under God,  indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Uh for those of you who are standing with  the signs, this is the housing authority. Roll call, please. See how long  it's been. Commissioner Bana is absent for roll call. Commissioner  Brown, that's here. Commissioner Jimenez,   presented. Commissioner Zapeda here.  Commissioner Wilson here. Tenny   Commissioner Scott present. Vice Chair  Robinson here. And Chair Martinez here. Our next item is statement of  conflict of interest. Are there any hearing? None. Our next item is agenda review  and this is the housing authority. There are   no changes and is okay. No changes. Our next  item is housing authority open forum. We have   one inperson speaker. If there's anyone joining  us online that would like to address the council   under housing authority, please raise your hand at  this time. Okay. Cordell Hendler. That's me. So,   good evening, U Chair Martinez.  Commissioners, for the record,  

I am Cordell Hendler and I have some terrific  news. So, as I was reviewing the consent calendar,   I don't have no problem with it. So, I  think it looks fine just how it is. So,   it's up to the commission to approve it and  so we can get the regular meeting started. Okay. Our next item is approval of the consent  calendar. We need a motion. We need a motion.   Motion to approve the consent calendar. I second  it. Okay, we have a motion by Commissioner   Brown. Second by Tenant Commissioner Scott.  Commissioner Brown, yes. Commissioner Himenez,   yes. Commissioner Wilson, yes. Commissioner  Zapeda, yes. Vice Chair Robinson, yes. Tenny   Commissioner Scott. Yes. And Chair Martinez. Yes.  The motion passes with Commissioner Bana absent.   Thank you so much. With that, we will adjourn the  regular meeting of the Richmond Housing Authority. And now begin the regular meeting of  the Richmond City Council. Roll call. Council member Bana. Okay. Council member Brown here. Council  member Jimenez presente. Council member Bana   here. Council member Zapeda here. Council  member Wilson here. Vice Mayor Robinson   here. and Mayor Martinez here. Our next item is  statement of conflict of interest. Are there any

hearing? None. Next item is agenda review and I do  not have any changes but um I have something for   public u I would like to uh uh do an emergency  item to uh uh present a letter um mentioning   the war powers resolution in opposition to  unauthorized milit military action against Iran. And then on the grounds, just to add on,  um I think you need to make the required   findings on the grounds that that the need to  take, um action arose after the posting of the   agenda on Thursday and that the item requires  immediate action because my understanding is   based on the contents of the letter that there's  a vote to take place um this week by the Senate.   Correct. California Senate. Yes. And if I may  add, can we put it on the consent calendar,   please? The emergency item. Well, you need to  first take a vote to add the emergency item and   the item would be the letter. Does everyone have a  copy of the letter? Yes. I have a point of order.   Yes. So, the emergency is because we're trying  to send this letter to the California Senate.   It is written to the our congressman, not to our  senator. I'm sorry. It's may I It's written to our   congressman and our sen senators are CC because  it's being discussed uh at the congress. I I   misspoke and so it's it's um I don't have  the letter in front of me but if you can

um it is to because the Congress will be  taking a vote at the national level not   the state it's about war powers resolution so  any war needs to be authorized by the congress   not initiated by the president correct  which is uh as the law states. Yeah. So   I second this the motion. Yeah. Basically  to protect our democracy. The motion. So uh   who made the motion? Yeah. I'm not Oh yes.  Okay. I made a motion seconded by Jimenez. Okay. Council member Brown abstain.  Council member Bana. Yes. Council member   Jimenez. Yes. Council member Wilson. Yes.  Council member Robin, Vice Mayor Robinson,   sorry. Yes, Council Member Zapeda. Abstain.  I just signed the letter now. Thank you.   And Mayor Martinez. Yes. The motion passes with  council members Brown and Zapeda abstaining. So,   the item will be added to the consent  calendar. and for a clean record. Um,   so we ha, so we just took a vote to add the  item, but now I'd like to have someone make   the following motion just to make sure we have a  record of what we're you're approving on consent.   May I? Yes. I make a motion to put that on  consent calendar. Okay. And then why don't   you read the read? I can read it. The consent.  The public cannot comment. Yes, they can. The   public can comment on consent. I I mean on open  forum we have to give up our open forum. Oh god.

So, um he you heard the objection from a uh  uh audience member who a disrunt disgruntled   audience member who uh spoke uh out loud without  uh uh recognition. Uh but we know who he is. Um   so should should we read it or at least the gist  of it what they're asking? Yeah. Uh, the proposed   motion, a motion to approve the transmitt of a  letter to the United States Congress expressing   the city council support of the Massie Kana War  Powers Resolution and opposing any offensive or   unauthorized military action against Iran  undertaken without prior congressional   authorization. Each member of the city council is  hereby individually and collectively authorized to   sign said letter as individuals and on behalf of  the city council. City staff is hereby directed to   finalize, transmit and deliver the signed letters  to the offices of representative John Garami   and to take all further administrative actions  necessary to effectuate the intent of this action. I second. The motion was by Mayor Martinez. Yes. And  second by council member Jimenez. Yes. And   this is to added to the consent calendar.  Okay. Council member Brown. Abstain. Council   member Bana. Yes. Council member Jimenez.  Yes. Council member Wilson. Yes. Vice   Mayor Robinson. Yes. Council member Zepeda.  Abstain. And Mayor Martinez. Yes. The motion   passes with count passes with council  members Brown and Zapeda abstaining.

U yes, Vice Mayor, I'd like to pull item U2B  for discussion. Which which one? U2B. U2B. Yeah. Yes, mayor. If I may, can we move  item W3 further up on the agenda   because there are some residents  to make public comments about it. Um W3. Uh move it to where? Um  on top of new business. Um,   no. I I think the um, so after W1  maybe. Okay. After W1. Thank you. All right. So that's it. So the only item being  removed from consent is item U2 be   like boy. That's it. Yes. And and uh item  and then item where is it? W3 will be the   second item under new business. Right.  Okay. Okay. Our next item is a report   from the city attorney of final decisions  made during close session. Good evening,   mayor and council and public. No final decisions  were made during close session. Our next item   is a report from the city manager and that  includes a new employee report. Good evening,  

mayor and members of the city council. KCRT,  can you please put up the slide deck? Thank you. Next slide. Next slide. I would like to thank  everyone who came out for the Black History   Month celebration at the Richmond Auditorium  on Saturday, February 28th. Um, this event was   extremely well attended. I would like to thank  the community recreation staff and all of the   council members that were able to participate  uh and honor and honor um Betty Reed Saskin uh   for Black History Month. Next slide. Also, uh,  coming up on March 7th from 10 am to 1 pm at   Nickel Park at the RC Complex is Richmond Women  and Girls Sports Day. Please come out and have a   good time. Next slide. Also on Saturday, it's the  annual Sisters in Solidarity International Women's   Day celebration. Um, it's hosted by the city of  Richmond in collaboration with various community   partners. It will take place at the Richmond  Auditorium from 10:00 a.m. to 2 pm. Thank you to   uh council member offices for helping lead the  coordination of this event. Next slide. Also   would like to announce that we're having a grand  opening of the Richmond Rising Hub. This is part   of our transformative climate communities work.  Um, and the grand opening will take place on March   12th from 400 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. Uh, this is at  the interotal station where we have BART, Amtrak,   and AC Transit Service. Um, the Richmond Rising  office is now located at 1600 Nevin Plaza. Please   come join us. Next slide. Thank you. If you would  like to receive the city manager's weekly report,   you may contact 510-620-6512 and someone  will help you sign up online. You can also  

retain the information at the city manager  on the city's website at www.rimanca.gov and   you can also scan this QR code now to uh  log on to the city manager weekly report.   Thank you so much to all the city staff who  are working collaboratively with community   based organizations and residents to host a  number of community events. And with that,   I would like to turn it over to HR Director Chiron  Taylor for the new employee report. Thank you.   Good evening, city council and mayor. I'm happy  to present the hires for the month of February.   KCRT. Next slide. Charles Inchel, senior planner,  community development. Juan Gutieres Jimenez,   police officer, police department. Douglas  Morrison, police officer, police department.   Snate Deep Sandu, Police Officer, Police  Department. Raina Schultz, custodial maintenance   supervisor in public works. Sequoia Taylor, code  enforcement officer 1, community development.   Joseph Urbina, maintenance aid 2, public works.  Alexander Kintterero, police officer trainee,   police department. Taylor Stein, police officer  trainee, police department. Kai Espinas,   lifeguard, community services recreation.  Alonzo Hernandez Argua, Maintenance Aid 2,   Public Works. Ezekiel Lopez, Maintenance Aid 2,  Public Works. Andreas Moreno Rico, Maintenance A2,  

public works. DeAndre Parker, maintenance 82,  public works. Miguel Vega, maintenance A2, public   works. Alexis Cardinius, Maintenance Aid 2, Public  Works. Missiel Reyes, Maintenance Aid 2, Public   Works. Alexander J. Cox, lifeguard, community  services, recreation. John Sherik, lifeguard,   community services, recreation. And we have a few  promotions to share with you today. Jessica Ray,   fire inspector 1, fire department. Melvin Thomas,  equipment operator, public works. Richard NRO,   police officer, police department. And that  concludes my report. Thank you for your support. Thank you, Shiron and HR. Great job. Our next item  is open forum. The open forum is an opportunity   to address the council on items that remain on  the consent calendar or items that are not on   the agenda. As a reminder, item U2B and that is  the second reading of the tobacco retail retailer   license amendment ordinance. If you would like to  speak on that item, you need to wait until that   item is called for discussion. The end of the  agenda tonight, we have 11 in-person speakers.   During open form, dialogue between the council  and the speaker is prohibited. Anyone joining us   online that wishes to address a council on open  form, please raise your hand at this time. We'll   start with the in-person speakers and then move  to the online speakers. When your name is called,   please come forward and line up behind the  speakers podium. And please line up closest to  

the wall so that we're not blocking the aisles.  When you are called to address the council,   state your name and your city residence is  optional. Please terminate your address to the   council when your name when your time is expired.  Each speaker shall be allowed up to two minutes to   address the council. The city of Richmond welcomes  your comments and requests that you present your   remarks in a respectful and appropriate manner  within the twominut time limit. Speakers are   Cordell Hendler, Benrich Foster, Solomon  Irvin, Bentio, Mark Wasber, Samantha Torres, and we could just take the time  right now to silence our phones.   Elsa Stevens, Don Gazny, Julian Keane, and our  last inerson speaker will be soil lab Cordell   Hendler. That's me. So, uh, good evening,  uh, Mayor Martinez, council. For the record,   I am Cordell Hendler, and I have some good news to  share with you all. So one for next month's agenda   is to acknowledge the Celisian College Preparatory  High School for their service day because I have   been observing these uh young individuals and they  have done a wonderful job. They have worked with   nonprofit organizations and others and so it  got me thinking it's like you know what Celian   deserves to be acknowledged. So I'm asking that it  can be agendaized for next month. So that's one.   Number two is um as far as the Chevron settlement  funds, I had an idea and and it came to me in a   vision that our streets are being fixed because  there has been a number of accidents outside   this area, the 27th and Nevin and others because  from a personal experience because I have almost   gotten hicked right outside Mr. pizza man twice  and it's like something needs to be done because   I'm asking myself we need safer streets because  you have a lot of residents that come through  

here they don't feel safe they do not feel safe  coming out of their own homes without getting   hit so that money should be allocated towards  fixing our streets and then third is like once   again staffing levels because I was watching the  video from June of 2024 and it got me thinking   We need to retain our officers. Once again,  we're in a staffing shortage and something   that has to be done because we want to feel safe  in our own community. And then the final thing is   um I've been listening I've been looking at  the Rafellis report regarding the port and   one of the things that I like to see is like  is a marketing manager for the port because   when you want visitors to come to Richmond,  they never knew about what what the port is   looks like. So now I just leave it at that. So  I'll give my time to Benrich. Benrich Foster. Solomon Irvin. Yes. How you doing, council? My name is Solomon  Irvin. I'm out of district 6. I'm the director   of Saving America's Youth. I started a youth  basketball program in district 6 at the BTA   uh community center. And since we started the  uh the team, the team has been going great. Um   we've tournaments. However, um we possibly need  more time like if we can get some weekends, some   Saturdays to do mentorship to really help these  kids. Um but since we've started this basketball   program, we've won multiple tournaments. We've  even got the um we do AAOU tournaments. So,   we were awarded to be at the state qualifier  in Roseville, California. I do have a 501c3. I   didn't have one last year, but I do have one now.  Um I was questioning about the 990, but however,  

um if we can possibly get funds to take these  kids to these tournaments, uh to go to Roseville,   they have them in, uh I've been invited to Reno.  The kids are doing much better. Um, and also throw   tournaments, like I said, at the BTA Community  Center. If we continue to do it, I was able to   do one, but if I can continue to be able to do  those, uh, tournaments, I think it'll be great uh,   for the youth. Um, we we do preach student  athletes. Some of the kids I've coached right now,   they're practicing right now as we speak. We  do have two days, Tuesdays, and Thursdays.   We practice at 6 to 8:00. And some of the kids,  like I said, are doing real great. They won state   championships at Elserto High. A couple of the  kids are playing for my basketball team uh now and   they were playing football. So, um I've been at  East Shore since a kid. Um I played Richmond Pony   baseball right at those parks. Um we're a resident  on 49th Street. We still own our family home right   there across the street. I went to Ste Elementary.  I went to Pora. I went to Elserto High. So,   I'm deeply rooted into this. And I just hope if  we can get some Saturdays, that'll be great. And   um we'll keep winning. We'll keep going. Thank  you guys. I appreciate it. Claudia Citrorum second Claudia Citroen. So um this council used to have a  five minute speaking uh enforcement. Last council   one member spoke for 20 minutes twice. So I just  want to say what was said in those 20 minutes was   gishkalop of misinformation. It was also a  um a collection of halftruths, arguments and   misinterpretations and making it impossible  to fact check what was actually being said.  

It was also a delusional diet tribe which  emphasizes that long angry speech is detached   from the reality and filled with false intense  criticism and it was also fabricated screed which   is it implies long tedious often angry rant.  I urge you, mayor, to reinforce the 5 minutes   speaking limit with the council voted on. And  if you get carried away, please pass on this   responsibility to the city clerk. She is fierce.  She knows how the rule works. And um let her   handle the timer, please. This was unacceptable  last time. And I yield my time. Bentio. Ben Tero, president of the Richmond Police  Officers Association. Hopefully you gave Pam   a raise because she's got to deal with all  your guys' nonsense from time to time. Um,   I'm going to read over the uh DA's report  that came out last week since a bunch of   people like to trash our guys and the things  they do and city managers don't know how to   uh respond to labor uh issues when it comes to  law enforcement. Angel McGallian McGallian's   conduct when contacted by the police department  demonstrated an attempt to inflict imminent great   bodily injury or death on responding officers.  Mgallion's actions after he came face to face   with police demonstrated an intent to inflict  imminent great bodily injury or death on one or   more of the officers on scene. Once Officer Remick  opened the door to the rem to the residence,   he sallallion standing next to a family member  while armed with two knives. McGallian turned   towards Officer Remick and immediately advanced  towards him. Mcgallian was aware that officer   Remick was a police officer because Officer  Remick announced his presence while in full police   uniform and McGallian observed family members tell  dispatch to send officers into the home. In an  

attempt to end the encounter peacefully, multiple  peace off police officers told McGallion to stop   three times. However, despite the presence  presence of multiple officers and Officer   Rimik visibly pointing a rifle at him, McGallion  disobeyed those orders and continued to advance   upon him. Officer Rimik retreated backwards and  away from McGallion, but McGallion did not stop.   It wasn't until McGallian continued to advance  on a retreating officer who was just feet away   from potentially being stabbed did officer  Remick and Stock stalking file at McGallian   multiple times in rapid succession. I'll skip to  the conclusion. For all the reasons listed above,   the use of force officer Remick and Officer Sto  stalking was reasonable under the circumstances.   The officers acted in lawful self-defense, defense  of others in response to exigent circ situation   where the officers on scene were in imminent  danger of suffering great bodily injury. As such,   no further action will be taken in this case.  Those are the people that you disparaged.   Those are the people again that the district  attorney, the people who actually really know how   law enforcement works. That is time is expired.  Thank you, Mark Wasber. It's not going to stop. The people in Venezuela and Iran was praising  Trump. There was cheering in the streets that   Trump took out the dictators and uh terrorists.  Uh now everybody's running scared. Even Saudi   Arabia is going to attack Iran. Iran is a  terrorist country. It's been like that for   over 50 years. Evil. They're responsible for all  the terrorism around the world. And uh Trump says,   "I'm just going to bomb the hell out of them."  And that's what he's doing. See, you people   write this letter to the congressman. He's an  idiot anyway. What makes you think that letter  

is going to stop anything? People are cheering.  People are happy that Trump did this. Of course,   it's all about the oil. He's taking Venezuela's  oil. Then he's going to take Iran's oil. Then   the people are going to rebel against the  government, what's left of it. Ain't much   of a government left. So you could thank Trump  for doing good things for the world by getting   the rid of these criminals and terrorists that  you people are supporting. We can't forget about   the mayor. Araguada went to uh Michigan,  was praising Hamas, had a big hat saying,   "Kill the people of Israel." Had a big smile on  his face with all the other radical terrorists.   Right. Face it, man. You're done. I see how in  the world you can sit sit there and smile by   over there bragging about killing people. I see.  Even the city council backed up the mayor when uh   he was on the hot seat with all this hate speech  against Israel. You're just responsible for him.   You people are out there sponsoring this stuff.  How can you You can't You have no right being in   our government doing stupid stuff like this. No  right at all. Time is expired. Samantha Torres. Good evening. My name is Samantha Torres and  I represent the Richmond United Soccer Club.   Proudly serving Richmond for 30 years. As a  501c3 nonprofit, we've provided affordable   community-based soccer programs for three  decades. With the upcoming FIFA World Cup,   we've uh uh coming to Levi Stadium, our campaign,  Think Global, Play Local, uh reminds us that while   soccer is global, it lives here in Richmond. The  vacant lots at McDonald and 12th Avenue have sat   unused for over a decade, attracting blight and  vandalism. We're proposing temporary activation  

beginning as early as April, including until  continuing until permanent development begins.   Currently, you will find these big, beautiful  banners highlighting the accomplishments of   black athletes from around the world in World Cup  soccer history. Now, imagine this. Playing soccer   in downtown Richmond, grabbing food nearby at the  lot, walking to the mini fields for a quick pickup   game, or watching your kids practice. That energy  could exist in downtown Richmond. Even if an RFP   is released this summer for developing those  lots, it could be years away. In the meantime,   Richmond faces a chronic shortage of soccer  fields. Temporary activation would reduce blight,   increase foot traffic, support local businesses,  and provide safe spaces for youth and families in   downtown Richmond. The McDonald Avenue Corridor  Task Force meets Tuesday, March 10th at 11:00   a.m. in the Richmond room. I've reached out to the  mayor, the vice mayor, council members Dr. Brown   and Miss Robinson, and I welcome the opportunity  to meet and move this project forward. I hope to   come back and present anou before this council in  the coming weeks. Richmond United has been here   for 30 years. We're not going anywhere. We're  ready to activate this space now for the FIFA   World Cup uh for our youth, for our families, and  for downtown Vitality. Thank you, Elsa Stevens. I wish I had brought a bouquet of roses. Um  I'm going to speak now on an item that's much   later and that is the uh presentation  a proclamation for u Nicholas trailer in 2019. Nicholas trailer was um a very big  reason why I kept the roof over my head. Um,  

I hope that whoever replaces him has half  the at least half the heart and half the   brains. He is such a I I have never met a um  public servant who is as hands-on as Nicholas   Trailer has been with our seniors at Heritage  Park. Um, and and he he didn't lie to us. He he   told us the truth even when it was ugly. um in  when our back in 2018 uh when the um landlord   tried to raise our rent 12% on people that are  on a fixed income that were not getting raises   um he said okay the law is with them but thanks  to ACE Alliance of California's for community   empowerment we managed to embarrass our landlord  and instead of a 12% we had a 3% rent hike for that. And and then over the years since  then when um our manage we have a a lot of   new managers. Whenever the manager tried to  do something shady like try to charge us a   $30 fee for nothing. Nicholas was on on  the case. Thank you, Nicholas. Don Gosny. Good evening. I'm not speaking so much to  the council right now, but I'm speaking to   the people at home. A little bit ago, I was that  disgruntled member of the public that tried to   interject. I don't want to be that person. I  really don't. My issue had nothing to do with   what you were trying to put onto the agenda. It  was the process of doing it. You wanted to put   it on the consent calendar by your own policies.  If I wanted to pull it off the consent calendar,  

I was supposed to get a hold of you at 2:00 before  2:00 this afternoon to do that. But I can't do   that because we didn't even know this existed  until you brought it up here. Okay. You say,   "Well, I could bring it up under public comment.  I you already voted on it before I'm able to get   up here on public comment to discuss the process."  Where is the democracy? Where's the transparency   on something like that? I said, you need to give  the public an opportunity to actually comment on   items that you want to put on there, whether it's  an emergency item or not. Give us an opportunity   to speak on there to let so we can share with  you our thoughts on the issue itself. That was   not allowed. You How is this any different than  what what Donald Trump did when he starts invading   countries on his own, saying, "I've got the power.  I can do whatever I want." because that's exactly   what the group of you with the exception of  Dr. Brown over there did. You all decided   we could put it on the the consent calendar.  You say, "Well, you can use your your public   comment time. You want me to give up my precious  public comment, whatever public comment that I   was going to bring before you to be able to talk  about that particular issue. For all you know,   I was going to had the cure for cancer. I had the  the solutions to the problems in the Middle East.   I had the our budgetary uh solutions there.  I can't bring that up to you because I had   to give it up to talk about the process. Think  about these things a little bit. What mechanism   do we as a public have? We cannot even say you  uh point of order. That's not an option. So,   how do we bring this to your attention when you're  doing something we believe is fundamentally wrong?   Julia King, to uh set the record straight,  uh we have not voted on that. that is on   the consent calendar which we will vote on uh  after this. The process not the item. Julia J.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council. For anyone  that doesn't know me already, I'm Julia Keen. I'm   a retired United States Army soldier. I don't have  prepared remarks. I just came on the spur of the   moment, but I'm I'm here in support of Nicholas  Trailer and the uh proclamation honoring him for   distinguished service as a executive director  of the Richmond Rent Pro program. He has always   been there for me and the members of of my um  community, Heritage Park, which is, as you know,   is a lowincome community for seniors. Uh we have  disabled people. We have we were owned the the   place is owned by a slum lord and in in exchange  for owning the place they get tax breaks in   exchange for having a certain number of extremely  lowincome people like myself uh retired soldiers   soldiers none of us did it for the money right  it's not a great retirement so Nicholas trailer   has always been there for us and even long before  I ever moved to Richmond he's been there what   eight or nine years he's done a fantastic job I am  deeply touched because not only is he there for us   and competent, but also he actually physically  showed up for us for what, eight or nine years.   Uh, every time we had issues with our slum lord  trying to raise our rent right before Christmas,   he was there for us, as was the city council.  Shout out. Good job. Um, most progressive city   council in the country. That's how we do it. But  yeah, I'm here in support of the resolution. He   uh the proclamation honoring him. Uh, you don't  get people like him very often. He was amazing in   what he did. He came to us personally and personto  person helped us with our renter issues that we   had with management and with the the slum lord  co corporation that owns our apartment complex   Heritage Park. And so he's just been wonderful  as have you. And I'd like to thank you all as   well. Good job. Our last inerson speaker Sohi  Labana. And if there's anyone joining us online  

that would like to address the council under open  form, please raise your hand at this time. Soila, hello. My name is Soila Bana and I'm here  tonight as a resident of Richmond. Uh,   I'm Iranianamean and I'm very sad to see my  motherland being attacked and I'm bombarded   by my fatherland. So, thank you council  for considering to send a letter to our   congressman for the war powers resolution  to limit the power of the president to   initiate the war. This is a war of choice. In  simple English, it means war of aggression.   illegal, unethical without any reason. The  people who burden and suffer um are not the   governments who decide or presidents, it's  the people of the countries involved. KCRT,   may I ask for the slides, please? I  have two um images to share with you.   So you see the bodies of 170 school girls wrapped  and ready to be buried. This is the result of war. I wish children didn't die. I wish they  would be temporarily elevated to disguise   until the war ends. Then they would return home  safe. And when their parents would ask them,   "Where were you?" They would say we were playing  in the clouds by Palestinian poet Bassan Kfani. Um  

and these are the graves being prepared for those  children. Those 170 children were among the 787 um people of Iran who were killed. 10 people  of Israel, 50 of Lebanon, one of Bahrain,   three of Kovate, one of Ammon, three of Emirates,  and six American. Your time is expired. Thank   you. That was our last inerson speaker. Now  we move to the online speakers. And we have   sorry we have four speakers. Nathan Lonzo, Devin  Kesha Gallon, and Serge Glushkov. Nathan Lonzo,   if you'll unmute yourself, you'll have two  minutes to speak. You can go ahead and start. Nathan, you can go ahead and start. Good evening,  mayor and city council members. My name is Nathan   Lonzo and I'm speaking on behalf of the Richmond  Police Officers Association and the officers who   serve this city every day. I'd like to read the  conclusion that Ben had read to the DA's office   final report regarding Officer Remick and Officer  Stalking. For all of the reasons listed above,   the use of force by officer Remick and  Officer Stalking was reasonable and under   the circumstances the officers acted in lawful  self-defense defense of others in response to an   exigent situation where the officers on scene  were in imminent imminent danger of suffering   great bodily injury. As such, no further action  will be taken in this case. The city council,  

the city manager was told were told that  the officers acted legally. They acted   within policy. They acted within the law.  But you all chose to ignore all of that. You sat there and made hurtful, ignorant,  uneducated comments about these officers.   And these officers came back to work this  past Monday. And you know what they did?   They went right back to work serving the citizens  of Richmond, protecting the citizens of Richmond,   protecting the employees of Richmond, despite  those comments that all of you made, calling   them murderers, saying they didn't act and perform  like they were trained to do. and they did and you   let them down and you should all be ashamed and  you should all apologize. Time has expired. Thank   you. The next speaker is Devin. Devin, you'll  have two minutes to speak. You can go ahead   and start. Good evening, Richmond. I'm back and  apparently so is the drama. So, pull up a chair   for chapter 2 of Richmond politity. The first  Mayor Martinez ill illegally cut off my public   comment last time and that was a violation of my  First Amendment rights. Let me be crystal clear.   I'm not running for office. I'm not campaigning  for anyone or anything in the city attorney. You   need to protect my rights. I am simply a Richmond  resident who spills tea. And honey, the pot is   full. Speaking of you, mayor, it seems council  member Javven spilled a little of your tea first   and then the RPA didn't just throw you under the  bus. They slowly backed it up, put it in drive,  

drove over you again, and backed up again. I'm  sorry. No one deserves that. Especially after   they defended you so publicly in the press, these  very tabers. That's not progressive solidarity,   baby. That's a hit and run. Now, let's talk  about what some of you are out there claiming.   Council member Jimenez and the RPA brokered  the $550 million Chevron settlement. No,   sister, that did not happen. In fact, it  was the unions who brought Chevron to the   table. The unions who did the negotiation and  brought you all to the table. So, let's be real,   girlfriends. Credit where credit's due. And then  there's council member Bana with multiple sources   telling folks you are now suddenly bffs with  Council Member Havana and the RPA. The same   RPA that defunded the police not once but twice.  At this rate, you won't have enough officers left   to establish evacuation routes when a when and if  a fire breaks out in the hills of your district.   Something you might want to ponder. Richmond,  everyone is watching. The cracks are wider,   but tea is hotter, so pull the peter cuz chapter  3 is already brooming. Good night. Thank you. The   next speaker is Kesha Gallon. Kisha, you'll have  two minutes to speak. You can go ahead and start. Isa Gen, if you unmute yourself. Sorry, can you  hear me? Yes. Um, hi, my name is Kesha Gallon,   I just want to say as a citizen of Richmond,  I feel like city council does not protect all   its citizens. Um the block cameras, they're  important to all the residents. Our community  

deserves to feel safe and supported and not just  feel neglected because Excuse me. Uh if you're   speaking to the flock cameras, you'll have to  wait. This is not the time to speak to that. Okay. Well, I'm speaking to the fact that I'm  not feeling included. the citizens of Richmond   is not feeling included when you guys make these  decisions. Every time you do something to protect   one community, you should be taking the whole  community into consideration because you're   creating disparities when you don't look at the  whole picture when you make your decisions on   certain things. So, yes, the flock cameras  is a part of it, but I feel like you don't   protect your whole community because you're so  focused on one community that lives within the   community. You guys have to do a better job with  uh protecting everyone. Everyone should feel safe.   And I get that you guys like doing worldwide  um service, but you got to service your own   community better. You're neglecting Richmond.  The streets are horrible. There are potholes   everywhere. Neglected. The community is being  neglected. And when you guys get on one issue,   you're just stuck on the one issue and you  neglect the other issues. So, I'm saying as   a city council, you guys need to do better with  protecting and serving your whole community and   not just one subset of community within that  community. Thank you. Thank you. And the last   speaker is Serge Kleskov. Oh, they just lowered  their hand so there are no more speakers. Our

next item would be approval of the consent  calendar. And as a reminder, item YouTube was   You're not going to remove it? Yeah, I I'm got  your answer. I would like to put it back on the   consent calendar. I'm sorry. Um we I misunderstood  the process that we're going through and it was   explained to me. Okay. All right. So, there are no  items that were removed from the consent calendar.   Um, so we need a motion to approve the consent  calendar. I move that we approve the consent   calendar. I second it. Council member Brown.  Yes. Council member Bana. Yes. Council member   Jimenez. Yes. Vice Mayor Robinson. Yes. Council  member Wilson. Yes. Council member Zepeda. Yes.   Council member Zapeda. Yes. Okay. Thank you.  And Mayor Martinez? Yes. The vote is unanimous.   Right. Now we'll be moving to budget session.  Item V1 is to discuss and adopt resolutions to   appropriate fiscal year 2024 through 25 audited  unspent funds in the amount of $8,213,680. Do we have any speakers? Okay, we do not have any  in-person speakers, but if there's anyone joining   us online that would like to address the council  on this item, please raise your hand at this time.   Good evening, mayor and members  of the city council. Shassa Curl,   Richmond city manager. Given the number of  attendees we have in the audience and online   for the sue subsequent items. I've requested that  uh finance staff um since this is a retune item   that we've now done several times move through  expeditiously after you hear this item. Um next   we have presentation from our auditor Badawi um  and associates. And so these are uh essentially  

companion items that we respectfully request  that you approve this evening and we will come   back at a later time with more specificity  and contracts pertaining to the expenditures.   Thank you so much. And with that, I turn it  over to Finance Director Combmes who will go   through the slide deck and we're happy to answer  questions at the end if there are any. Thank you. KCRT, can you please put up the  slide deck? Slide two, please. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Um, good evening,  mayor and members of the city council. Um,   tonight I'll be presenting our unspent funds  report. Um, so you're right now you're looking   at an overview of what we'll be covering tonight,  including the recommended action for our fiscal   year 2425 audited unspent funds. Um, next slide,  please. Here's our recommended action for tonight   to discuss and adopt the resolutions to  appropriate 8.21 million in audited 2425   unspent general funds. These are one-time funds.  So, the recommended recommendation focuses on   investments that align with policy priorities  and best practices for one-time revenues and   resources. Next slide, please. So, let's start  with where we ended the year financially. Our   audited results showed that general fund closed  fiscal year 2425 with an unassigned balance of   62.8 million. That's about 24% of the next year's  budget or planned spending or our expenditures. Um   our reserve policy requires 21% or 54.6 million.  So we're about 8.2 million above the target and   that's what we refer to as our unspent funds.  So, per council adopted policies and direction,  

10% of those unspent funds goes towards our  other post-employment benefits section 115   trust and another 10% towards our pension section  115 trust. So, that works out to about a little   over 821,000 for each. So, after those required  allocations, we're left with about 6.57 million   um available for appropriation,  which we'll be um discussing tonight. So just for some context, since 2021,   the city has increased staffing roughly  from about 500. And next slide. Next slide. Go back to personnel. That's good. Why does it  keep moving? So personnel, you're good. Okay. So,   just for some context, since 2021, the  city has increased staffing from roughly   590 to 665 full-time equivalents. And that's  about a 12.7% increase in our workforce. Um,   this has allowed us to improve our grow or grow  our service delivery in many areas throughout   um the organization. But it also has increased  our costs. So, as our workforce grew, we also   saw health premiums costs increase. So these costs  alone have risen substantially since 2021. And for   many cities, these are shared costs between the  employer and the employees. Um for um and but in   Richmond, we have chosen to contribute 100% of the  Kaiser weight rate which has increased in cost by   anywhere between 40% and 44% since 2021 depending  on the plan. So, just as an example, the Kaiser   family plan rate back in 2021 was a little over  2,100. It's now over 3,000. Um, so it's increased  

by almost a thousand. So, on top of that, recently  approved laborus um and some still in negotiation.   We'll continue to increase our personal expenses  going forward and why that's important. Um,   so while we're, you know, this incremental hiring  that, um, has been very thoughtful and fiscally   responsible, um, to help build organizational  capacity, it does mean that our baseline costs are   increasing and that may leave us with less unspent  funds going forward in future years. Next slide,   please. Sorry, forgot about that. That's I  was confused. Okay. So, we continue to monitor   worker adjustment and retraining notification  or warn notices um because major major layoffs   either in Richmond or regionally signal um broader  economic stressors that can directly or indirectly   impact Richmond's revenues or our ser our service  demands. Um so, last year Richmond received just   a couple of these warrant notices. um and it had  very minimal fiscal impact from what we can tell,   but we are seeing surges in these warrant notices  um in in many areas in California like LA, um San   Francisco, Orange County, and we're definitely  seeing it in Slano County. Um we're hearing that   Slano um Solano Countyy's warrant filings alone  include over 600 layoffs, and they're estimating   that with the indirect um job layoff impacts,  they're estimating somewhere between a thousand   to 2,000 layoffs. Next slide, please. So, here are  staff's recommended allocations for those unspent   report unspent funds. So, we're recommending the  contributions which we talked about earlier to   the pension section 115 trust, the OPED section  115 trust, 250,000 towards Point Matti annual   monitoring, and a little over 6.3 million for  complete street improvements. Next slide, please.

So taking a look at that, the Melotti annual  monitoring with a recommended allocation of   250,000. This funding supports our ongoing work to  track remediation progress including groundwater   and soil cleanup and to stay closely coordinated  with our regulatory partners as a site continues   to evolve. So even though the US Navy remains  the primary responsible party for the cleanup,   this city still plays an important oversight  role. So our involvement in that helps keep   the remediation aligned with  long-term land use planning,   especially as shoreline and development  discussions continue. Next slide, please. So last year we reached a major milestone with the  transfer of shoreline and open space to the East   Bay Regional Park District and our environmental  monitoring and regulatory coordination have   continued smoothly. So looking ahead to 2026,  we'll keep advancing cleanup milestones,   maintaining compliance, and strengthening  coordination to support long-term stewardship   and future planning for Point Mil. Next slide,  please. We are also recommending six a little   over 6.3 million of unspent funds go towards  complete street improvements. This important   work helps us make our street safer, more  accessible, and more welcoming for everyone.   Elements may include things like better sidewalks  and crosswalks, improved lighting and landscaping,   ongoing pavement maintenance, and adding  drought tolerant plants to support   long-term sustainability. So altogether these  investments help us to modernize our streets   um support multimodal travel and create greener  more resilient um public spaces. Slide please. And here is our recommended action

to discuss and adopt the resolution  to appropriate the 8.2 million in   audited unspent funds. And that concludes my  presentation. and happy to answer any question. Thank you. Um before we start uh questions,  uh I think I'd like to have public comment.   So I'm opening uh the the floor. We have  one inerson speaker, Cordial Hendler. So good evening again, Mayor Martinez  and Council. For the record, Cordell   Hendler has looked at the presentation and as  Emily pointed out, the ball's in your courts,   so I don't have no problem with this. So,  someone makes a motion, seconds it to you   the to use the unspent funds as presented. So,  that's that. Thank you. We have one speaker online and the speaker is Kesha Gallen.  Kisha, you'll have two minutes to Oh,   she lowered her hand. There are no more speakers. Oh, okay. Never mind. I'm sorry. He  should You can go ahead and start. Well,   I really don't need two minutes, but my thing is  if we're uh voting in to appropriate the funds,   I'm going to say we earmark some for  just the haven of the streets because Elsa Bronte area uh over by Brighter Futures,  the streets are really bad over there and   they need to be uh fixed as soon as possible  because it's really big potholes over there

and that was it for me. Okay, thank you.  There are no more speakers. All right,   so public comment is closed and  we will now go to questions. Do we   have council member vice mayor Doria  Robinson? Hi. I I'm wondering how um how we came to the conclusion of these  recommendations because you know especially   sitting as liaison on different committees  you hear different needs and um some of those   needs are urgent and I'm wondering why we're not  addressing some of those needs with fees funds. Well, at this juncture, we're also given the  timeline, we're going to be hearing midyear   soon. So, um, given that we have a paving  index that's significantly deteriorating,   uh, if we are able to make appropriations  sooner for the paving index, uh, contractor   and the other ancillary improvements, those can  enable staff to get those things queued up now   uh, under the existing contract so that when  we're officially out of the raining season,   that work can take place this calendar year.  Um and so any other programmatic needs um could   be considered at midyear. So I want to make sure  that everyone's aware of that the currently most   of our unhoused services are operating under  very specific grants that has very specific   jurisdictions that they can deal with. That means  that many many many people who are unhoused do   not have emergency resp support support because  our emergency funds are exhausted. And if they   do not fall under the the the jurisdictions of the  current grants, then there's nothing for them. And   so people come for support, they come for aid, and  there is no emergency support right now. Like we  

we unless they fall into the existing grants like  they are on a highway or or whatnot. And you know,   there have been growing encampments along Carlson  Boulevard and there isn't anything we can really   offer them unless they're on a freeway or in  a freeway area. Um, I I would like to propose   that we put some of this money. I was told that we  would need even $50,000 from Michelle Milm who who   is, you know, intimately knowledgeable about these  things just to have an emergency response fund   so we can offer something to people and not just  move in encampments from one place to another, but   actually have something to offer them. Um, I think  that's a very good idea. of the question that I   have is that we continuously have allocated for  the past four years uh reimagining public safety   dollars with an unhoused allocation. So if that's  the experience that staff are having, um they   should look at the existing budget allocation for  the in the unhoused line item budget and provide   a policy recommendation to their department heads  uh for consideration. And so what in this I think   we could do that in in the budget cycle and I  think I'm encouraging they could do it now. It   doesn't have to be in the budget cycle. What I'm  saying is is that there's already funding, right,   that the city council appropriated um under I  was told that that funding was exhausted. I am   not aware of that because it's been allocated on  an annual basis. So, I would like to go back and   check with finance staff. I'd be happy to email  the council, but my understanding is U. Mubin has   uh has that appropriation or deputy city  manager White, you have experience with that.   Have those appropriations continued or do we need  to make an additional allocation for reimagining   public safety? So there has been an annual  appropriation from general fund for the unhoused   uh um initiative under the reimagined  public safety initiative originally since   uh for past few years and those are annual  appropriations and uh so I think you're talking  

about the set of funds that we are now having an  RFP for. Is that what you're talking about? Yeah,   that's like $2 million. No, no, that's a different  there's a different so there's uh ERF12 and 3. So   that was like $30 million from the state. The  city council has been appropriating funds under   the oposes of re-imagine public safety into four  distinct programmatic areas. I would be happy to   go back with staff and do a complete analysis of  that and if staff have a mechanism and I've shared   this with staff when they made this suggestion to  the respective department heads director Velasco   and Chief Simmons if this is something that  they need to do that they should certainly   look at their existing budgets and make those  appropriations and come to the city council with   a a contract. I don't think it needs to um the  council has made an appropriations and so we need   the staff to look at their existing budgets and  if this is how they want to spend the funds they   can certainly do so and if they need an additional  appropriations then they can certainly request it.   Can we make sure that that is the case? And if  that is not the case, make make a portion of   these funds available so that $50,000 of I've  told staff that $50,000 in the scheme of our   budget is like 0.0, you know, 1%. But for folks  that are on the street and have no other options,   it means a huge difference to them. Right. But the  the issue that I'm also trying to convey to the   council is is that sometimes sta departments have  capacity bandwidth. So even if a staff member has   a good idea, right, we have to have the capacity  to affectuate it, right? So the question is is not   just do we have a good idea, but does the staff  have capacity to effectuate the idea in compliance   with the procurement guidelines, right? And so  that's the question for the department head. So,   I I've asked Chief Simmons and Director Velasco to  look at this issue and provide a recommendation,   but I just I don't want to pretend that like  if we make an appropriations right now that  

it's going to solve the problem because we  have to know part of the issue is is we have   nonprofits that also have capacity limits,  right? And so we need to make sure, yeah,   I think as long as we end tonight,  making sure that we have at least   $50,000 from whatever source, so there is  some pot of emergency funds to deal with the   the major issues we're having with encampments  and and people on the street and no services to   offer them. I'm particularly thinking about what  we've been dealing with along Carlson Boulevard. I conferred with staff and a lot of the money  has been allocated to SOS and other vendors. So,   if the city council would like to  make an additional appropriations,   you certainly can do so, but the funds have been  appropriated as to nonprofit service providers as   council directed. We do not have the financial  capacity for staff to individually expend   $50,000 without a nonprofit partner.  That wouldn't be good procurement. So,   we we can make an additional allocation for  emergency funds, but we are going to go through   a procurement process to expend it. I think in  the past we've had tools, right, with a nonprofit   partner, the hotel vouchers and other things with  a nonprofit partner, right? So, you know, anyway,   I don't want to argue about the specifics, but  what I what I've been hearing in our task force   meetings and outside of the task force meetings  that they do not have tools to support people   who don't fall into these very fine like grant  parameters and that leaves a whole realm of people   who are in encampments just being shuffled back  and forth. And so, what I would like to do tonight   is make sure that there is resources to create  such tools however way we need to create them.   We welcome the opportunity to do that.  We have to one of the nonprofit partners  

that led this work unfortunately stopped  doing so. So we have to find new nonprofit   partners that are willing to work with us in a  collaborative manner to do this work. Thank you, Council Member Brown. Thank you so much. Um  quick question about that. Leading off of   what vice mayor was um expressing, have those  orgs expressed like exhausting the funds that   you said were appropriated? Like have any of  them? I don't know. I haven't uh I haven't had   direct conversations. Okay. No, I'm asking because  just as a justification to redirecting additional   funds. I'm not sure um of the specific needs of  the organizations. I'm happy to look more into the   administrative record regarding the expenditures  and what they have been assigned for. I've   asked staff to make sure that the city unhoused  website is kept kept up to date. Okay, cool. Um,   also regarding the 6.3 million, uh, it's sort of  vague about, um, about the pavement and and just   this overview of um, complete street improvements.  Is that tied to anything in particular?   like a certain amount would go towards paving,  a certain amount would go towards like lighting,   other improvements, and have there been areas  that have been identified? Um, at this juncture,   staff have preliminary ideas, but before anything  is approved, any contract would come back to the   city council for approval. Okay. And lastly, um,  are any of those projects tied to any of our CIP   projects that are listed? Uh, they may be. We're  not sure at this juncture. We we've been getting   ready for midyear uh and then next fiscal year  and planning the community readings as well as  

um developing revenue enhancements and then  putting together policy options for kids first. So   um there hasn't been a lot of time to to  dig deeply into this. So the 6.3 is just   to set aside it's just it's just a it's just an  envelope. Okay. It's just we're putting the money   in the envelope under this kind of programmatic  uh approach and we'll find out what it'll Yes.   be allocated towards at a later time. Yes. Okay.  Thank you, Council Member Jimenez. Thank you for   the presentation and the suggestions. Um, I  am glad that uh we are putting the money in   the improvement of street escapes and pavement.  Um, I also hear the concern that council member   uh Robinson um spoke about and I agree that we  if if the funds are needed, we should have these   funds also from this. Um my my question is or  my suggestion probably is um we had been talking   about that um as we pave the streets if they are  some improvements that this street needs to be in   doing like complete streets projects that we do  it. Um I haven't seen kind of like uh how that   is happening because we actually uh the city  council had been increasing significantly the   payment funds. Um when we I I started the payment  funds were uh the allocation was $4 million and   last year we allocated over $10 million and we  continue to to do more because we know that it's   needed and a lot of uh resident in district six  uh like the complaints are about um street safety  

in that regards. Um so I just want to make sure  that when the plan is presented and what while we   continue to uh make significant investment in the  pavement that is a plan to really make complete   streets and address all the unsafety intersections  that we have. Um so that uh we are making the   improvements that and and that we need and people  are seeing these improvements even if potentially   might be that we don't pave all the streets  but what the ones that are pave we are paving   uh are like we are addressing the other issues.  So how is that like is that something that uh are   you planning to do and Yeah, my question is okay.  Um, that's a very good point. Um, uh, we are happy   to come back to the city council and have more  specific more discussion on the specifics. Um,   deputy finance director moving has indicated that  there's $259,000 uh, remaining unallocated in the   unhoused budget. Lou, can you go into this? The  city appropriated $1.32 million under the unhoused   intervention program for unhoused community  services and of that uh utter date expenditure   has been $546,000 and incumbrances are $514,000.  That leaves with the available budget of $259,000. Okay. And my last question is uh it's great that  we have unexpended funds. Um where is the bulk   of that unex like the saving where where is coming  from? Increased revenue and decrease um because of  

uh staff but as theus are finalized and we  continue to increase staffing um it is anticipated   that the amount of unspent funds will continue to  decrease. also frequently staff our appropriated   funds, right? And if they're not spent like  was described in right now, then what happens   is they roll into the unspent money and then we  frequently try to reappropriate them or we look   around and we're like, "Oh, how can we improve  programmatic service in this area and we add   uh additional funding or if we can expand ours  at a facility, we do those sorts of things." So,   we're always happy to take new ideas for um  appropriations and work collaboratively with   staff. We just always try to make sure that if  there are funds remaining that are unspent that   we work with the department to allocate those  and if we need an additional appropriation we   will always for something that's a high priority  we will always put it on the city council agenda   to make an additional appropriation and then  we have a true up at our quarterly report or   at midyear. So we're trying to be very flexible to  meet the council's uh public policy uh direction. Council member Bono. Thank you. I believe my  questions were answered already, but I'm going   to make sure they are. So, um I assume there is  flexibility within the budget. For example, when   it talks about urban forest and planning planting,  we've been asking the public works to identify the   plants that are drought tolerant, fire resistant,  relatively deep roots for erosion control. And it   takes some um budget like 50 to $75,000 I assume  to do the study by Contraosta Conservation   District or other nonprofits. So I assume  there is room for those programs within this

verification please. We currently have at least  two ar we currently have at least two arborists on   staff and so they've been working with the urban  forestry council and other uh nonprofit partners   uh to develop strategies and plans to impre  increase the median. So we're trying to   basically do two things. We're trying to  do complete streets when there's complete   reconstruction that can be done. But if we have  other corridors, right, that are in disrepair,   right, where we just have there is no planting,  right, then we're with the city staff that we have   on board now. We have staff that are designers  and we have planners and they can design the   landscaping projects for those areas and public  works staff can buy the materials and implement.   This is just regarding the corridors then not  beyond that. Primarily the corridors once we the   corridors are complete then staff can this is  could be operations and maintenance staff just   like they replanted McDonald Avenue are my request  is that they replant all of the key medians   throughout the city and so that the city standard  is what Marina Bay looks like. It's right. Um I I   don't want to take too much time here, but I think  uh we need to have a discussion with public works   about actually identifying appropriate plans  for um high fire hazard severity zone areas   um and um areas susceptible to erosion. And I have  one more question because this budget is allocated   in an envelope for public works. If uh we at  the council happen to pass the item regarding   um Le Moine or cheese park improvements,  uh could this budget be helpful with that? At this juncture, I I am not prepared to  to answer because I'm not sure of all of   the other requests that are currently pending.  

um for that item. We are suggesting that  if that's the priority of the city council   to move that park forward that that would be  something that would be considered at midyear. And when would that be? Uh we're we hope um  to have additional financial items on the city   council agenda on the 17th and 24th. Okay. So it's  coming up soon. So this month and there will be   positive to allocate to that item. We will make  the city council aware of opportunities to make   additional appropriations and we'll implement  the city council's policy direction. Okay. So,   I wonder if I should ask you to at least consider  adding restrooms for Cheese Park and the rest of   improvements from midyear budget. Would that be  acceptable to you? Um I it's not up to me. It's   it's up to the council. Yeah, but your support  usually counts. We are asking for your blessings.   I mean, I I I'm trying to balance, right? Like  we've got one council member asking for an   appropriations here, we've got another one here.  I'm happy to do whatever you all come to consensus   on. Okay. Then I would like to request that uh  the restrooms that are absolutely necessary for   the park to come from this uh for Lamoy Park and  the rest uh we'll talk at the meteor budget. All   right. Uh, council member Sepeda. Thank you, Mr.  Mayor. Thank you for the presentation and from   what I see here, you've been listening to the  community. So, thank you. It's very important   because these are the top things of the community,  at least from me. Either you heard it from others,   right? But I'm sure that you've heard it from the  community because this is some of the top stuff   they need. They want their roads paved. They want  their lights on, their sidewalks working, and they   want to be able to have nice landscaping. So, this  aligns with that. So, thank you for doing that and  

and continuously leading us to the direction that  the community is telling us to go into. So, thank   you for that. Um, as we do this, we have so many  different reports and I'm hoping that we we could   also follow some of those along. At this council,  we have had in the past, what is that three and a   half years, several people present to us where  the highest needs are. There are districts,   if we want to go by districts, that have very low  canopies, and there's other districts that have   lots of canopies. We have district two, district  4 with the most park access, the most parks,   the most park access. District one barely has any  tree canopies, barely has any uh parks, then you   get to district six, district three. So, kind of  prioritizing where the need is. Do I want district   2 parks to be topnotch? Yes. And I've got the  president of the neighborhood council here for one   of them, right? Yes. But do I want to make sure  that we're putting the needs of all of Richmond   first? That's what needs to come first. So, making  sure that the communities at most need that we're   putting them up. So, we can please take a look  at that. We've got the I'm looking at the uh uh   green uh greenery plan that we had a couple years  ago, the city tree inventory. It shows uh several   areas here, and I'm sure you can go and look at it  as well. It's got uh building woods, shield reads,   iron triangle. They have a tree canopy of uh  about 5.8%. 8% other places in the city have   a much much higher percentage. Right? So, making  sure that we're looking because we want to make   sure again to uplift the community altogether.  Uh and when we're looking at uh lights, uh I  

love that we're already starting to put in solar  uh from the community. It's getting really great   positive feedback, especially as more and more of  the copper wire is being stolen. if we can please   continue that trend because that's a really great  trend. So, if we can install more solar lights and   I mean trying to make it equally and equitably  around the community and focusing on areas with   the most need. If I may on that, council member,  just as a brief update, um council member Jimenez,   we've received the shipment of materials for the  solar lights and are anticipating that we'll have   a full project timeline by the end of the week  and we'll share it with the council when it's   finalized. Um I I don't we're not trying to have  favorites, but we do have a lot of opportunities   and high rates on Carlson. So that is where staff  is planning to commence. You don't have to have   favorites as long as it's district. I'm just I'm  just saying for the good of the order. That's been   an area where we've had a lot of uh issues and  where we have a significant um affordable housing   along the corridor. And so we want to make sure  that um and there's always a lot of incidents   that are happening on that corridor. So, we want  to make sure that we improve uh the lighting there   and adjacent at BTA Park. Thank you. Thank you.  And that's that's important, right? Again, I do   I want it all in district 2. Of course, I do. But  I think you have some lights. Shh. We want to put   Yeah. No, but equitably, right? So, making sure  where do we need it? And you all know where are   the the places where people are crashing the most  because they can't see very well. Where are we   having all the accidents? So, thank you for taking  that into consideration. Uh and then it might be   coming in in at the midyear budget as well. Uh  but last time we met about monies. I remember   and and I I had it in the back of my mind. We  took some money away from the HVAC system and   I know it's not part of this conversation here per  se, but I just want to make sure that we keep that   on the top of our mind that we took money away  from the HVAC system for the rec center. And I  

know that during the summer it gets very very hot  and they don't have enough windows uh during the   hot summer in September uh so they can cool off.  We want to make sure that we keep our employees   and the people that are using the rec center uh  cool enough the kids, right? So we I know that   we took some money from there for other stuff,  but hopefully we can find some money to give it   back because we want to keep people safe there as  well. Uh but thank you so much for this. This is   great. Uh the upgraded crosswalks are really going  to help uh hopefully with the uh le having less uh   uh sideeshows because they're not going to be able  to because they have less space. We're going to be   able to increase people crossing the street safer.  So, thank you. This is a great project or a great   plan. Thank you so much. Thank you, Council  Member Wilson. Thank you. So I am, you know,   supportive in general of the idea of using the  surplus for the complete streets improvements. As   several of my colleagues have already said, that's  I think a need that cuts across our city. Um,   I'm I'm glad to hear a special shout out  for Carlson as an example of, you know,   there's a close to a half mile of Carlson that's  been in complete darkness for many months now and   it it is quite dangerous. So, I'm so I'm glad  that that that this money is being put to what   I think is a very um practical and popular use. Um  I'm still a little bit unclear whether uh council   member or vice mayor Robertson's concerns about  the um money for emergency money for homeless   uh unhoused people has been met. So, I I'm sort of  holding a space for that. I'd like to sort of um   if some if there's a need there, I would like to  see that need served with some of this money. I um   also want to flag the fact that uh you know it's  and I and I sound like a broken record. I know   I've only been on council for a year and I know  I've I've given this speech before, but I think   every time there's a surplus, I'm going to raise  the fact that while I'm glad there's a surplus,  

when we get we are given a surplus, we can only  spend it on one-time expenses. We cannot take the   6.3 million and hire additional people to provide  park landscaping or, you know, staffing like that.   But it it always makes me ask maybe since this  all comes out of the general fund and I realize   that part of the reason you have more you know  the revenue did better than we anticipated. We   got more grants, but there is this pattern where  we are consistently having these sort of 8, 10,   $13 million surpluses. And I wish we could go into  a time machine and go back and use that money for   enhancing staffing and the sort of things that  people have been asking for, you know, including a   lot of this having to do with roads and parks and  and and safety and so forth. And um we don't have   that time machine. And so I want to sort of make  the suggestion that when you're doing your sort of   um forecasts for what your expectation of revenue  is is that you be less conservative. Like you know   we're consistently outperforming what the  predictions are. And again good problem to   have in some senses like we're going to get to  spend more on streets than we thought we would   and I think that's popular and important but I  would have really rather have seen some enhanced   um city services with this money. So is is that a  question I don't know or a comment? Do you agree?   Um yes and that's what we were trying to do on  slive five by go by increasing our staffing almost   13%. It's very very hard for us to um to hire  people any faster. Like this is the fastest that   I've ever seen city of Richmond hiring people.  and we want to continue to onboard people and   train them and set them up for success um in  their roles. And so the one of the areas that   the council has been most aggressive is around  the investment uh in public works and they're   doing a great job. like I've heard from many of  you when you and members of the community when you  

drive around things are really starting to look  better and so um they're working with the crews   they have now there was a new you know there's  new people onboarded all the time and as they   continue to get those people onboarded and trained  will continue to hire more people. It's just we're   not unfortunately the type of organization that  can go from 590 to to 790. We've got to do things   incrementally so people are trained and know how  to to do the work that the council's expecting in   the manner that you're expecting um and that  we comply with all the procurement rules. So   it takes a while to actually spend money when  you're a city. All right. So we'll try to get   it up higher every year. Yeah, I appreciate that  and I appreciate the commitment to doing that. Um,   last thing I'll just say quickly is my sense,  if I heard you correctly, is one of the reasons   why to take this the bulk of this money and put  it into complete streets is that there is a a a   capacity for spending that relatively quickly. And  so I just want to sort of make acknowledge that I   heard council member Bana's request for using some  of the money towards bathrooms. I wholeheartedly   support bathrooms at Cheese Park, but I don't know  that I support using this money for bathrooms at   Cheese Park because it sounds like that might be  a few months away and and we're kind of picking   projects that can be spent this month with this  money. Am I Am I understanding that correctly? We   were trying to enable the council to do that if  that's your policy direction. Um, we have looked   at bathroom options and like different types of  bathrooms that might work like prefab bathrooms or   um, you know, even the mayor mentioned a type of  bathroom that he saw in Martinez. And so staff are   exploring what are the options to and what I've  mentioned is that if the council would like to add   more bathrooms citywide, we would want to amend  the park's master plan. So we can say like, okay,   at this level of park, if it's a community level  park or whatever the appropriate level is, if the   council wants to add more bathrooms, we're happy  to do that. We'll amend the park's master plan   and we'll ask for an appropriations to do that.  Yeah. So, Oh, thank you. Yeah. All right. Um,  

I want to thank you for for the work you put into  this plan. you put a lot of thought into it and   um uh if I remember correctly when uh when the  um uh operations and maintenance department   made a presentation their their budget for  doing everything that needed to be done was   uh way way way more than than uh what we can  provide. So uh any amount that we can uh provide   to help improve the city is is much needed. Um,  I hear from people all the time about different   types of improvements that can be made. Uh,  as uh, Council Member Wilson was mentioning,   um, uh, Carlson has been dark, you know, it's  it's like driving driving through a tunnel and,   uh, and and the striping also needs to be painted.  I was driving down it uh during during a rainstorm   and uh because of the darkness and because of the  striping wasn't wasn't there. It was you it was   very uh pleoso. Um so so um uh there are other  places where we need to put in uh cutaways for   for wheelchairs. Uh I've seen a lot of stop signs  going up. We need more stop signs going up. Um so   um uh we've said that that uh education then uh  then uh improvements um and then uh enforcement.   So so um if people are going to slow down, they  need to have signs that tell them to slow down   or to stop. Um and um I think that uh the money  that we've allocated is not enough but but it's   it's what we have and um and I also know that  these are envelopes which means that even even  

in the upcoming months uh if emergencies come  up we can reallocate the monies. So, so, um,   uh, I think this is a a good place to leave the  monies at this point. Yeah. And there's always,   uh, ongoing requests. Like just yesterday,  public works told me, "Oh, these are three   new things that are going out to bid and we  think we're going to have a shortfall." So,   it's a it's I don't mean to make light of this,  but we have ongoing requests and we're going to   have ongoing reappropriations because every time  we design a project, it may come in under budget   or over budget and then we'll come back to the  council and request additional appropriations. And   again, pertaining to the bathrooms, we understand  that it's a priority, Council Member Vana. If the   council wants to do just one, we're happy to do  that. If they want to look at several parks, we're   happy to do that. Um we are just trying to make  sure that since we're still in the rainy season   um we've got contractors on board. For example,  the most recent was at McBride and Gainor where   the the curb cuts have been happening the new  ADA ramps. Um and that we also put aside funding   to continue those ADA access points so that when  the um ADA uh blue curb policy comes to council,   we have to have funding allocated also for that  as an example to make sure that we have ADA access   for those areas that are approved. So, those are  some of the things that staff are working on that   we'll bring back to the council in uh in March  and April. Council member Bana, thank you. So,   city manager, you're aware that the 2010, we are  in 2026 now, 16 years later. The 2010 parks master   plan identifies community parks. One of them is  Lam Moine Park, commonly known as Cheese Park,   and it says must in capital letters, must have  bathrooms in addition to a set of other amenities.  

And I'm shocked that you're whitewashing the  problem in response to council member Wilson   and saying if more bathrooms are desired  by the council in general, will finish.   That's an inappropriate term to say to me. I'm  sorry. I'm not sure if you're a aware that that's   an inappropriate term to say to me. What did I say  to you? I'm going to stop talking at this point.   Okay. So you you respond in a way as if it's  a luxury item or request additional bathrooms   at the city level while it's a desperate  need of the community to have restrooms   at the only community center in district  4 which should have had it since 2010. So,   with all respect for all the work that you and  everyone's doing, I would like to request that   I would like to make a motion that we pass this  item with allocating budget for restrooms for the   only community park in the city of Richmond that  does not have a restroom even though it's been   identified since 2010. Do we have a second?  Council Brown has not spoken. You missed her. Uh, do we have it dies of lack of second? Um, council  member Sepa, I'm sorry. Uh, council member Bound,   did you raise your hand? Yeah, I did raise my hand  and I asked um a few questions regarding where the   money was. So, the city manager basically told  us that this money is just being approved tonight   to be later determined like itemized later. Yes.  Okay. Thank you, Council Member Sepa. Thank you,   Mr. Mayor. And I think there's so many needs. We  have we are backed up in needs and we are uh there  

just doesn't matter what the need is. If you need  to go pee, there's a need to figuring out where.   Uh in my uh morning coffees this Saturday, I had  a person say that he has constantly been seeing   a couple individuals just in the middle of the  sidewalk going to the restroom because that park   that is closest to his house by the greenway does  not have proper restrooms and people are doing   their stuff on the street. Um so there there are  lots of needs. So maybe we have to figure out rep   prioritize again coming back again. All right, we  talked about parks a couple years ago. How do we   prioritize them? The the what we what I remember  and we have a couple new council members. We can   come back again and rep prioritize. But we're  looking at the communities with the most needs   first. Those are the lower income communities.  Uh in regards to restrooms, maybe we can look at   that as well. Uh because I just top of my mind  I don't think that any parks in district 2 and   we're advocating for our own districts. I don't  think any parks in district two have restrooms.   The greenway and the part that's within district  2 does not have restrooms. So if we're going to   be doing that maybe it's trying to figure out  I know that when I came back from the National   League of Cities I brought up uh some information  from some quick build restrooms. Uh they were   very innovative restrooms that were pre-built. Uh  they're they're very inexpensive. So those might   be something that we could invest in and probably  just put them in in all the parks that need them.   It's a quick fix. Uh they also included uh blue  lighting. Uh I know that it's a concern for a lot   of individuals. They want to be able to use the  restroom, but they want to make sure that people   that are doing drugs don't go and take over the  restrooms. Well, these restrooms with blue lights,  

once you go in, you can't see your veins. So,  it's a deterrent. Uh, so they're not going to   be locking themselves in there trying to uh inject  themselves with anything. So, maybe we look at a   holistic holistic uh uh bathrooms plan to making  sure that we're approaching the whole community   in district 4 is important because they also don't  have any, but there's a lot of them as well. So,   how do we make sure that we're reaching out to all  the communities uh that really have from lots and   lots of needs to a little bit less? So, thank you,  uh, Vice Mayor, uh, Robinson. So, um, there's lots   of great thoughts tonight and all the things that  we need. It's always happens at a moment like this   when you have an opportunity to um, put resources  towards things. I wanted to bring up a couple of   things. Um, one of them is that we have this great  park equity process that's happening. Um, and part   of that park equity process is determining what  we mean and what should be um, a minimum amount of   a standard of maintenance of our parks. And that  standard of maintenance of the parks is not only   you know what do how frequently should we dump the  trash, pick up the litter and things like that but   also you know how much money how much do we budget  for regular maintenance of things like bathrooms   and security and things like that. Um it this this  plan is is really a great plan. It's city staff,   it's community members, it's a bunch of different  people who are working on it. um and some some   partners like Trust for Public Land uh to come  up with what what this can really do and it can   can you know guide budgeting and guide policy  and and whatnot. So I just wanted to bring that   up again and make sure that people understand a  part of that is considering what's the difference   between the maintenance needs of a community park  as opposed to a pocket park as opposed to whatever   and which what park should have what resources. Um  so all these things are in the works. We've been   working on these things behind the scenes. not  only working on these things, but also looking  

for funding streams, long-term and permanent  funding streams that could actually help pay for   that elevated levels of maintenance, that standard  of maintenance that we want to see. That stuff is   in motion. It's happening. It's great. It's public  processes. Um, and we also went through a lot of   work and put together a CIP plan that considers  equity, that considers a lot of different things,   and there's things that are moving forward in that  CIP plan. So I think the most appropriate thing   for the TE's park is to make, you know, include it  in the CIP plan, give it a rating and have it move   forward with the other projects. Um, I think that  that's that's the way that we talked about moving   CIP projects forward is, you know, making sure  they're included in the plan, giving it a rating,   and then moving it forward with everything  because there's so many projects and we can't   do everything at once and whatnot. That said,  I I would like to make a motion that considers   uh that uh takes into consideration that includes  the recommended action to discuss and adopt a   resolution to appropriate fiscal year 2425 audited  unspit funds in the amount of8 million $213,6680 with the one Um, addition that we ensure that  there are uh emergency funds available for to   make sure there are services for the unhoused  that do not fall within the purviews of the   existing grants. So they cannot be serviced by  the existing grants. so that we don't just move   people in encampments from one street to the next,  but we actually have a place to offer them to go. Um, and that should be a minimum of $50,000.  If it's the $250,000, that's even greater. Um,  

we have a lot of need. If people have  looked around the city, there are a lot   of encampments and we're literally just moving  people from one street to the next because we   don't have anything else to offer for people  who don't fall within the existing grants. I say yes. Uh council member, I have a question  before we vote. Um, is the $50,000 coming   from the appropriation for this item or are we  going based off the city manager's recommendation   to seek money that that's still available, the 259  for unhoused? My motion would be to take it from   where it's available. So if it's available and  there's an unspent amount of money that we can   allocate to it and then it's becomes available  and we can use it for that purpose that's great.   If it's not available then I would like to ask  the city staff to choose where best to take it   from here. It's a small amount as compared to the  other amounts. Um but it would really help people   have another alternative besides camping on on  the streets outside of people's homes. If I may,   you know, ask a clarifi clarifying question. So,  the $259,000 in the unhoused intervention program   that is available, does that account for your uh  desired action or would you like to reduce this   u proposed? So, if that $259,000 is available to  service these folks that do not fall within the   the other grants because they're not on a highway  and they're not or whatever. If if if they could   be used to make sure that there are services  for this group of people who are are falling   through the net, which is a lot of people,  then then fine, let's use that money. Yes,   absolutely. Those funds are general fund cities  uh uh part of the original appropriation,  

original adopted budget. So those are not subject  to any grant. So those are not grant funds. Those   are city's own general fund appropriation that  was made in the beginning of the fiscal year.   So that is well over $50,000. That is $259,000.  Yeah. I guess what I'm trying to say is that I   want them to be used for the express purpose of of  making sure there are services available to this   this population of unhoused people. I don't think  that it would serve serve the purpose if we added   to an existing contract that is only servicing  an X area or only picking up trash over here.   like there there is a need to be able to offer  services to people wherever they are in camping   wherever they are and not only in this area where  there's going to be trash picked up or only at you   know at this thing. I want it to be an emergency  response fund that can respond to anybody wherever   they are to make sure that we can offer services  to as many people as possible until we don't have   the resource anymore. To me that seems like  a program focus type of direction as opposed   to the the funding availability uh recommendation  because well just like when we're allocating money   to a specific source or a specific pro project  I'm saying that this is the specific project this   is absolutely so that is a larger scope unhoused  interventions which is which I believe it sounds   like uh council member Robinson what's your uh  desired u outcome is out of this action would   fall under that uh pot of money which is general  which is which is general fund not specific for   certain group or certain type of service it's just  an unhoused intervention under the initiative of   reimagine public safety so so I I'm going to  move forward with because I think the motion   still stands you know just with the clarification  that if the pot already exists that I just want to  

make sure that that gets allocated and it's able  it's available for use can I make since since   This is related to the act for a specific unspent  funds. If I may propose that staff come back and   uh I want to say Chief Simmons and Director  Velasco who are oversee core the core contract and   um the unhoused work that they work with their  respective staff Michelle Milm and Jesus and   come back in 90 days with a plan to address  uh the concerns you outlined today within the   $259,000 appropriation that currently exists  because that's within this fiscal year budget.   Right. So, can we move faster than 90 days? It  feels like we have we have people who are I mean   if we can if we can rep prioritize we are happy  to rep prioritize other items. Yes. If you if you   look at the encampment list that gets sent out on  a weekly basis, many many of those encampments,   this is where I get very districty on you, are  in district 3. and my residents, the residents   in my district, not only my district, they're  definitely everywhere, but are are really like,   you know, it's it's heart-wrenching to see people  in the condition that there are on the streets   and then to wait 90 days to address it seems  unreasonable, especially if we already have   the money and we already have core. We just  need to direct the services to what we need,   right? But we have to have a a a service pro.  What I would like to do is for us to meet with   Contraosta County and for them to support our work  in achieving your policy directive because they   manage the coordinated entry program. We have  to get unhoused residents in the coordinated   entry program so that they can achieve wraparound  services and so that then they're queued up to go   into the hotel that we're currently renovating.  So we're happy to work on what you're doing,   what you're suggesting rather, but we have to do  it in collaboration with the county. That's great.   Uh you know what we really need? We really need a  core team that's that's anchored and centered and  

housed in Richmond. Like that's what we need. We  have so much need and for them to have to come. I   was when I was doing the ride along with the with  the police officers, we waited for hours to core   to come to a group of of folks who were sitting at  the food co plaza saying they wanted services. By   the time core actually made it out, they had left.  No, I've since I've been the city manager, I think   we've amended the core contract two times. We keep  expanding it and we keep we pay for it from the   city of Richmond to provide our own core team.  So motion stands. I think I have a second. So council member Brown before voting. I'm still confused because the  city manager just said that we should come back   within 90 days. You said sooner. Um this is not a  situation that's just sprung up overnight. People   in district 3 and district 1 have been sleeping on  the streets for she said that she could prioritize   this so that it can come back sooner than 90  days. Right. And so I'm saying like are we   talking about money from here or this is an added  this is is this additional to the appropriate that   there's $259,000 available and there's going  to come right that's a separate pot of money   that's right but but that's that's not this  money that's and I feel like she's putting the   car before the horse and I just want to be clear  trying to mix two different items into into one   u so I was going to say that I would like to  to allocate $50,000 from this budget towards   emergency funds. And it's a small amount. I want  to make sure that we have that was the amount   that I was told by by folks that they could  really use to emergency response. If there's  

an additional money available, that's great.  We can hurt help more people. I second that. Any more discussion? Are we taking No, I'm just I'm I'm I'm in favor  of supporting the uh emergency funds. It's just   that it it's not from this pot of money. It's not  agendaized and then to try to say, "Okay, well, if   I can't do it this way, I have to do it this way."  Like, no. The city manager, you're constantly on   all of us about procurement process and so forth  and so on and processes and all of the things.   Like, why are we not council? We are not to have  conversations with with the audience. I'm not   talking to the audience. I'm talking to the city  manager. You were responding to the audience. I   wasn't I haven't even looked at the audience  actually. I'm trying to understand where we're   how I'm going to vote based upon this um what we  have in front of us. I am all for allocating these   funds. Are we going to borrow it from this part  and put it back later or what? Because if we have   almost 300k available, why are we not utilizing  those funds? So, we can use I'm going to clarify   my motion. My motion is to accept the recommended  action with the adjustment that $50,000 from   these funds would be put towards emergency  unhoused services. I say on that. Yeah. Okay. Are we ready? Council member Brown, no. Council member  Bana, yes. Council member Jimenez, yes.   Council member Wilson, yes. Vice Mayor Robinson,  yes. Council member Zapeda, yes. Mayor Martinez,  

yes. The motion passes with Council Member  Brown voting no. for the clarification of   the administrative record. Since this is an a  budget appropriation, we need to make sure that   it's clear that the resolution will be amended as  follows. The resolution will be amended to with   remove $50,000 from the complete streets line  item that's currently budgeted at 6,320,944. that will be reduced by $50,000 and will be  reappropriated to $50,000 in unhoused funds   that will be spent collaboratively between the  community development and police department to   outline the policy objectives previously mentioned  pertaining to emergency unhoused services. Next, we have the presentation from the  auditors. So, if the auditors can please   come up and the clerk will mute the motion.  Item B2 is to receive a report on the city's   annual comprehensive financial report  for fiscal year ended June 30th, 2025. We have one inerson speaker. Anyone  joining us online that would like   to address the council on this item,  please raise your hand at this time. Thank you.

Are we going to break KCRT, can you go ahead and  bring up the presentation? Two, three, four. Ask him to go. What are we waiting for? Next item is V2 to receive report on the city's  annual comprehensive financial report for fiscal   year ending June 30, 2025. And we have one  public speaker in person for this item. I'm going to go ahead and get started. Good  evening, uh, Mayor Martinez and members of the   city council. I'm Emily Combmes, the finance  director, and this evening we are presenting   the city's annual comprehensive financial  report or what we refer to as the ACTUER for   the fiscal year ended June 30th, 2025. The ACER  is the city's primary audited financial report   providing a complete picture of our financial  position, the results of our operations,   and long-term obligations. It is prepared in  accord in accordance with generally accepted   accounting principles or GAP and independently  auditor by audited by our outside auditors but   Dawi and Associates to ensure transparency and  accountability in how we steward public funds.   So with that I'd like to introduce our external  auditors from I'm sorry I'm going to pause for   a second. Can we have a little bit of quiet in  the room? It's hard to hear. There's lots of of   of conversations. Thank you. Thank you. So,  I'd like to introduce our external auditors  

from Bedawin Associates um who will walk you  through the results of this year's audit. Thank you, Emily. Uh good evening. I  am Ahmed Badawi, the audit partner with   Badawian Associates, and today I'm going to  present to you the results of the 2025 audit.   So I'm going to start here by uh letting you know  the agenda what I'm going to cover today. I will   uh give you a brief overview of our firm and  the engagement team assigned to the audit. Uh   the deliverables and the scope of our audit. Uh  brief overview of the audit methodology that we   followed. Uh areas of primary audit risks that  we identified. uh the type of audit opinion we   issued and provide you with a 30,000 foot view  of the numbers in the financial statements,   provide you some of the required communication as  your independent auditor and then a brief overview   of the new accounting standards coming your way.  So I will start here by overview of our firm and   the engagement team. So on this slide here is  our firm by the numbers. We have about 25 years   of experience. We are a highly specialized firm.  We only perform municipal auditing for state and   local government. Uh we work mostly with cities.  We currently work with about 44 cities. We have   about 30 employees and so far we have zero legal  or disciplinary actions against the firm. Actually   the firm just completed its peer review and we  have received a clean audit opinion as well. Same   like the city. Uh as far as our engagement team uh  this was the composition of our engagement team.   I was the engagement partner uh we always have  a quality control reviewer. Uh this person is   in the background reviewing our work and making  sure that we adhere to professional standards.  

We had one senior auditor, one IT specialist and  three professional staff assigned to the auditor.   In terms of our deliverables and the scope of  our audit, we were mainly engaged to provide   an opinion on the city's basic financial  statements. That's what we refer to as   the annual comprehensive financial report or  the acter. We were also engaged to perform an   audit of the federal grants, what we refer to as  a single audit, and that's a compliance audit of   the federal grants. report on the joint powers  financing authority on the housing authority   prepared the what we call the SEO report which  is a state controllers's office report for the   city the sewer district the public financing  authority and the two pension plans perform   and agreed upon procedures on the appropriation  limit also known as the GAN limit and then finally   communicate with the governing body which is what  I'm doing Tonight, a brief overview of our audit   methodology. I don't want to bother you too much  with this, but I just wanted to let you know that   the audit is not really done at one point. It is  really performed throughout the year. It starts   with planning early in the year where we gather  information from management to assist us with   planning the audit and and and staffing it. Uh  the interim phase of the audit focus on evaluating   systems and processes that the city have in  place and internal controls and we perform risk   assessment and design audit procedures at that  time. The year- end phase is when the city close   its books and we come in and perform our audit  procedures and obtain audit evidence for all the   account balances. And then finally the reporting  phase when we draft the financial statements and   issue those final audit reports. Uh, Mr. Mayor, if  I may quickly, is it um, uh, fiscal year or actual  

year? Uh, fiscal year fiscal year 2025. Uh, June  30, 2025. Areas of primary audit risk. I always   like to say to all my clients that there are no  risk-free audits. Any any audit will involve some   risks. Um and the risks we identified for the city  of Richmond are pretty standard. They do exist in   almost every audit we perform. So I want to cover  those. The first one is the risk of management   override of controls. Uh although it sounds really  uh strong but we are not aware of any instance   that management override or overridden controls.  However, this is a risk that always exist.   management is the one responsible for designing,  implementing and monitoring internal controls and   they can sometimes override them. So we perform  certain audit procedures to minimize that risk   to an acceptable level. Some of those procedures  is making sure that we assign more experienced   personnel to more complex areas of the audit that  we incorporate an element of unpredictability   in the audit process that we uh consider how  management select and apply accounting principles.   We uh test journal entries prepared by management  review any accounting estimates prepared by   management. evaluate business rationale for any  unusual transactions and also evaluate fraud   inquiries that we perform with city staff. Another  area of risk is improper revenue recognition. Uh   auditing standards do require us to consider this  area to be an area of a higher risk. So we rely   heavily on confirmations with third parties. We  sent confirmations to the county, to the state,   to granting agencies and to others asking them  to confirm uh amounts submitted to the city and   we reconcile those to the city's accounting  records. Uh regarding the proprietary funds,  

the enterprise funds, we do a lot of ratio  analysis. We do testing of of revenues and a   variety of other procedures to get comfortable  with the revenue amounts. And then finally,   estimates are areas of a higher risk as well  due to the degree of uncertaintity involved. So   just wanted to bring to your attention some of the  numbers estimated in your financials from the fair   value of your investments, the useful life of your  capital assets, the actuarial assumptions that   goes into measuring the pension liability, the  oped liability and also the claims liabilities. Um moving on to the auditor's report and financial  statements. So we have issued our audit report and   the audit report state the standards that we  followed and those are the generally accepted   auditing standards and also government auditing  standards. We have issued an unmodified opinion.   In simple terms that means a clean opinion.  Uh an unmmorified opinion in details means   that we believe that the financial statements  are fairly stated in all material respects,   that all significant accounting policies have  been consistently applied, that all estimates   are reasonable, and that all disclosures are  properly reflected in the financial statements.   Uh we have also disclaimed an opinion on the  Richmond Housing Authority and also the Richmond   entities, Richmond Housing uh Corporation,  Richmond Red and uh the Richmond property   RHA properties. Uh those audits um are ongoing.  Uh we are currently wrapping up the 2021 audit.   uh but obviously for the 2025 that information was  not readily available and we have disclaimed the   opinion on it. Uh to summarize for you some of  the numbers in the financial statements on this  

slide is a summary of the city's assets over the  last three years. Uh I would say that the numbers   are fairly consistent. There are increases in cash  investments and also in capital assets and that's   the results of the operations and the city's  ongoing projects. Uh but otherwise numbers are   fairly consistent year-over-year. Uh liabilities  similar situation on this slide. The summary   of the city's liabilities over the last three  years. Uh I would say that the only thing that   had a slight increase was compensated absences  which is a liability for vacation and sick leave.   uh and this is the result of implementing a new  accounting standard in fiscal year 2025 that led   to that increase in this liability. Otherwise,  uh numbers are fairly consistent year-over-year. On the following slide here is summary of the  city's net position or city's equity. This is   strictly the assets minus liabilities. And I want  to just bring to your attention that the equity   is divided into three main categories. The first  one net investment in capital assets. This is not   really in a spendable form. This is how much the  city invested in streets and roads and buildings   and other assets. Then you have restricted amounts  and those have outside legal restriction. It can   be granting agencies or gas tax, unspent gas  tax or bond money or other restricted resources.   And then finally the unrestricted amount are  the amounts under the council control and   this is currently a deficit $300 million. Uh  obviously the the main reason for that is the   pension liabilities the oped liabilities uh they  they are long-term liabilities that are on the   balance sheet and causing that deficit. Um on this  slide here we compare what we call the net cost of  

service to tax revenues. The net cost of service  is the cost of running all city departments minus   any revenues that those departments bring in on  their own. Whether those are revenues charged   to users for service or grants that offset the  program cost. Uh the idea is to see whether tax   revenues are sufficient to cover that net cost  of service. As you can probably see over the   last three years tax revenues were significantly  above the net cost of service. That's definitely   a good indicator. The net cost of service can  fluctuate. Some years you can have grants that   offset the net cost of service and the second year  the grants is gone. So you see the cost of service   going up and that's what happened in 2023. Um  also the pension expense have contributed to a   low cost of service in 2023. But the tax revenues  are been consistently increasing year-over-year.   If we were to just focus on the  general fund, uh on this slide here,   we look at the unrestricted portion of the  general fund fund balance and we compare it   to annual expenditures. The idea is to see if  all revenue sources stop coming in, how long   can the city continue to pay bills using existing  fund balance. And we've determined that the city   can probably do that for about four months.  This is fairly consistent year-over-year. I   do want to clarify that this year there was a big  increase in expenditure but a big part of it is   our leased uh equipment. The city got into over 20  million plus in new leases and those are reflected   in the expenditures here. So so that's one of  the reasons why those expenditures are higher. uh if we just focus on pension liability which  is really the city's largest liability. I wanted  

to bring to your attention that the pension  liability is an estimated number and one of   the most significant assumptions in developing  that estimate is the discount rate. Accounting   standards do require us to disclose to you what  the liability would look like if that discount   rate is either increased or decreased by 1%. So  currently the city's liability for all pension   plans are about 356 million and this number can  fluctuate between 220 to 520 million depending   on the discount rate. Uh similar to pension  also oped the other post-employment benefits   or retirey medical benefits is an estimated  number also depended on the discount rate. So   this slide is also demonstrating to you what  the number would look like with a 1% increase   or decrease. The next part of my presentation is  the required communications as your independent   auditor. Uh on this slide here is a summary of  the responsibilities the audit firm versus city   management. Our responsibility is to provide an  opinion on the city's financial statements whether   it's fairly stated or not to evaluate internal  control over financial reporting including the   tone at the top making sure that management is  sending the right message to the organization   about the importance of controls the importance  of addressing audit findings uh consequences of   committing fraud and so on. Evaluate compliance  with laws and regulations. Ensure that the city's   financials are clear and transparent and then  finally communicate with the governing body.   Management have many responsibilities in this  process. So management has to take responsibility   for the financial statements. Our audit does  not relieve management from this responsibility.   Management is responsible to establish and  maintain internal control over financial   reporting. Make all financial records available  to us during the audit process. Establish internal  

control that will prevent and detect fraud,  inform us of all known and suspected fraud,   comply with laws and regulations, and take  corrective action on audit findings. Uh, in terms   of our independence, it is our responsibility  to maintain our independence. We evaluate   uh any additional services that we offer the  city to make sure that it does not impair our   independence such as compiling the afer on behalf  of the city. We have an independent reviewer that   reviewed this acter to ensure that we maintain  our independence and that allow us to comply   with AICPA and the California board of accountancy  independence rules. As far as timing of the audit,   that the audit was not performed timely this  year. Even though I would say that the audit   was substantially complete timely, but there  there were last minute adjustments that the   city wanted to record and that has caused us  to just hold off on issuing the final report   for a little bit. But I would say that the  audit was for the most part complete timely   and it was just something that came up in the  last minute that we needed to record those   adjustments. But the city was prepared timely  and the audit for the most part was performed   timely. Uh significant accounting policies and  unusual transactions. So there were no unusual   transactions but there were two new accounting  standards that the city implemented this year.   I mentioned one of them earlier regarding  the vacation and sick leave and that there   was another disclosure standard CASB 102 that the  city also complied with during the fiscal year. In terms of difficulties encountered in performing  the audit, we encountered no difficulties. The   city was cooperative, provided us with good  documentation, was responsive to our requests,   and as I mentioned earlier, was prepared for the  audit uh when the audit was scheduled to start.  

uh significant audit adjustment and unadjusted  differences. So this normally occur when we have   uh found errors in the numbers presented to us  by the city. Uh that's not unusual. There were   some adjustments and reclassifying entries  and management has agreed and posted those   adjustments. Uh as far as deficiencies in  internal control over financial reporting,   so we identified no material weaknesses  in internal controls this year. So,   um, we may have had some housekeeping items that  were communicated to management, but nothing that   will be significant enough to be brought to your  attention. And then finally, just a summary of   the new accounting standards coming your way. Uh,  there are always new standards. Uh, in 20 in 2026,   there are a couple of new standards. One of them  is significant. Gasb 103 the financial reporting   model is going to have some significant changes  to the aer and how it's laid out and the content   of it. Uh the other two are disclosure standards  and then for the first time in many years it looks   like 2028 may be a year with no new standards  to implement. Uh that hasn't been the case in   many years. Hopefully it stays like that. Uh but  with that I want to say thank you for allowing   us the opportunity and I'm more than happy to  answer any questions. Thank you. Do we have   public comment? We have one in person speaker. If  there's anyone joining us online that would like   to address the council on this item, please raise  your hand at this time. Speakers Cordell Hendler. Well, so good evening again, Mayor Martinez,  council. For the record, I am Cordell Handler   and I am a Richmond resident. So, I do want to  thank Mr. Badawi uh for that presentation. So,   I don't have no problem with it. So, I think  it's outlined it right there. So, I ask you,  

Mayor Martinez, and the council to  receive the report as presented. There are no other public speakers. All right.  Uh public comment is closed. Now, it's time for   questions. Uh Council Member B. Thank you.  Uh, some quick questions. Um, first of all,   I'm very glad that you have a good experience with  our city administration. We think they're awesome.   I'm happy you um second that in your experience  with them um auditing. Some quick questions. So,   you you mentioned grants. Did you look at the  gr all the grants received, performances, any of   them returned by the city? Well, we don't look at  every grant. uh the city is subject to the single   audit which is the audit of the federal grants uh  and those uh u the city may have a you know 10 15   grants but they're not all going to get audited.  There are rotations that the feds um dictate for   us and we audit those grants as per the rotation.  Uh this audit is actually ongoing right now the   the compliance audit of the federal grants and  we expect it to be issued this month but so far   um nothing has come up. Okay. You're doing that  audit as well. That is correct. Okay. Thank you.   So I have a quick question about page 18. I  don't get what that page is trying to convey. uh are these uh three portions related to each  other or unrelated? What what are we looking at? Uh um net position. So yeah, so the net position  is the city's equity and uh we are just slicing   that equity into three categories that makes up  the total equity. Yeah. I don't understand the  

negative equity especially. Yeah. So basically uh  equity is the city's assets minus liabilities. Uh   so you can look at it the same way you would look  at your your personal finances. You would look at   your assets, your home, your mortgage as your  liability. The net investment in capital assets   would be the equity in your home. Your your home  minus the mortgage. Uh the restricted amounts are   uh restricted assets minus liabilities to be  paid out of those restricted assets. Uh and then   the remaining amounts are the unrestricted assets  minus the unrestricted liabilities. Uh this amount   is negative because the city have unrestricted  liabilities like pension and oped that adds up to   almost $400 million. The city does not currently  have assets to offset all of those liabilities.   Got it. Thank you. And quick question about  page 21. I understand that under 2025, you know,   1% decrease or increase could fluctuate a lot.  Why do you consider it for 2023 and 2024? It's   in the past. Oh, I I was just providing like how  the numbers are changing year overyear. Uh so and   and and if I may because then the council can see  like in a from a historical perspective if things   wouldn't have gone according to plan if they would  have gone better or worse then how things could   vary so significantly. So it helps us for us when  we're developing our five-year financials. So this   is just a way to look at that differently.  I appreciate that. Thank you. I'm done. Council member Himenez. Yeah. Thank you for the  presentation and I'm glad to hear the good work  

relationship that you have with the city staff. Um  just wondering around um negative fund balance and   if you find something that is like worrisome like  you mentioned that but I just wanted you to talk   a little bit more about that. Well, the city have  a few negative uh fund balances that have or funds   that have negative fund balance. Uh the majority  of them are grant funded funds and that's pretty   typical we see because what normally happens is  the city would incur the expenditure and then   we'll file for reimbursement. However, if those  reimbursements are not collected within 60 days   from the end of the fiscal year, then the city  cannot recognize the revenue and that creates   uh a deficit in the fund balance. However, for  most of those funds, if you look at their balance   sheet, you're going to see an amount called uh  deferred re uh basically unavailable revenue.   And once that revenue becomes available meaning  like collected then that will reverse that deficit   in those funds. And we have the plan to like  are we making sure that we will collect this   after the 60 days? I mean most of those funds  have already been built. It's just that uh the   collection didn't happen by August 31st, which is  the cut off for recognizing revenues for the city.   If I if I may, council member um Jimenez, usually  where we have a lot of negative fund balances is   in our in our departments that are heavily grant  funded as Badawi stated. So for example, one of   the reasons why um Mr. who's a project manager  has been shorttime assigned to transportation   um to work with deputy city manager White and to  work with Daniel and engineering staff is because  

we had some programmatic concerns right that came  up. They're holding back funds. We're basically   on a an improvement plan uh from historical things  that happened prior to us me being in city manager   and so forth. So there's there's issues in the  transportation. A lot of times our engineering   grants those tend that we've been doing the staff  has been doing a lot of catch-up. But overall when   I have our monthly finance meetings I really do  appreciate that unilaterally across the city and   every department um you know we have over 200 uh  you know our grants are several hundred millions   of dollars right now. Um, last time I checked  we had about 160 grants and so staff is really   doing a remarkable job um, staying on top of  things, but from time to time things do slip,   especially when their staff transitions. And  so we'll be coming back with an item to update   the city the city's policies and procedures  citywide to try to put um some additional   measures in place uh, beyond financial also at  the programmatic level to to to create new norms.   Thank you, Council Member Sepa. Thank you,  Mr. Mayor. Thank you for the presentation. Uh,   and I see the really great numbers, and  I want to thank both you for giving us a   presentation and putting this together, but also  acknowledging our finance team, our city manager,   and others. Uh, on page 17, it's great to being  able to see the liabilities and the deferred   inflows of resources. And if I'm reading this  correctly here, one thing that has always been   uh in everyone's minds or people that I've talked  to is the OPIP liability for an example. And I   see that continuously going down. So that is a big  kudos for everyone involved helping us to decrease   that. Uh the OPIP liability, other post-employment  benefits, it's it's a big liability that's been   holding Richmond down for many, many years. that  along with the the item right next to it, the  

pension liability also seeing that continuously  going down. So, it's a really great trend. So,   whatever you are all doing, Miss Curl, continue  doing it because this is going to make Richmond   be even better. The less liability of these two  that we have, the more freedom we're going to end   up having at the end of the day. So, I want to  just acknowledge that. So, thank you for that.   Thank you. Um, and then I want to make sure  that I'm understanding. Uh, page slide 19,   our tax revenues are increasing, which is great.  Nobody likes paying more taxes, but I like   spending people's taxes. So, keep it going because  the more taxes we have, the more we can hopefully   being able to invest. And I think the last item we  just invested more money. So, let's make sure that   people can see that their taxes are being used  properly. But again, this is great to being able   to see that we're collecting more tax revenue. I  know that it's probably to do with a lot of other   uh measures that we've had like measure U and  others. So, thank you for that as well. Uh and   that is it for my accolades. I just wanted to make  sure that I acknowledge the the great numbers. I   know you you just went over them. Uh but making  sure that people understand what those really mean   at the end of the day for Richmond. It's become  more freedom when we have less liability and we   have more access to hopefully being able to fix  our crumbling infrastructure when we have more   tax revenue. Uh, and then with that, if I can just  ask whenever anyone has a chance, Miss Christian,   uh, whoever might be, if we can get an  updated presentation on the website,   it's currently as the draft presentation on the  website and it looks at least when I open it up,   uh, some of the numbers are squished. So, it  looks like it's it's a different uh, variation,   but other than that, thank you so much for  the great presentation. Thank you very much.   Are there any other speakers? If not, um I also  want to thank you for the audit. Uh you confirmed   uh uh what I see and that's uh that's always  a wonderful thing especially when our city  

manager has done a great job of uh guiding  guiding us uh towards solveny and security. So   uh once again uh the report has been received and  much appreciated. Thank you. Thank you. May I'll   make a motion to accept uh receive the report  the item as is. I second the motion. Okay. You   have a motion by council member Zapeda. Second  by council member Wilson to accept the report. Um   council member Brown. Yes. Council member Bana.  Yes. Council member Jimenez. C. Council member   Wilson. Yes. Vice Mayor Robinson. Yes. Council  member Zapeda. Yes. And Mayor Martinez. Yes,   the vote is unanimous. Thank you. 8:29.  Our next item under new business is item W1 and that is to receive a presentation  approve a transitional contract amendment   and provide direction to staff  regarding the Flock CCTV system,   Flock Drone as a first responder program and  Flock automated license plate reader system.   We have, let's see, 34 inperson speakers.  Anyone joining us online that would like   to address the council on this item,  please raise your hand at this time. Good evening, honorable mayor and city council.  uh Timothy Simmons, uh City of Richmond Police   Chief. Um and for your reference, I also have  with me a member of uh Flux managerial team, Mr.   Max Weinstein, and he's sitting behind me. He'll  be available for any of the question and answer  

uh period that comes comes around. Uh before  I get started in my presentation this evening,   I just wanted to have a moment to express  uh a word from my own my heart here. Um,   so before I begin my formal remarks in this  item, I want to speak briefly from from my heart,   not just as your police chief, but also as a  member of this community and somebody who has   family that lives in this community, immigrant  family who lives in this community. My highest   priorities have always been clear.  Protecting the safety of our residents,   improving the quality of life in our  neighborhoods, and ensuring that everyone   who lives and visits Richmond can do so safely  and confidently. Public safety is not just about   responding to crime. It is about creating  an environment where families feel secure,   businesses can thrive, and community can gather  without fear. I also want to acknowledge something   that is important at the outset. I understand  that flock safety and the technology that they   manufacture can be polarizing and controversial.  Conversations about surveillance, privacy,   and government authority are deeply personal and  at times they're emotional. Those concerns are   real and they deserve respect. And as a police  chief in this city, I take them very seriously.   I firmly believe that there is a path forward  where we can protect our residents from physical   harm while also safeguarding their privacy and  guarding against emotional harm and mistrust.   Public safety and civil liberties are not mutually  exclusive ideas. In fact, they must coexist if we   are to maintain the trust that is foundational  for effective policing. I'm confident that this   commitment to both safety and constitutional  protections is something the city council and   the police department share. As we move through  this item tonight, my goal is to ensure that we   approach this thoughtfully, transparently, and  in a way that reflects our shared values and our  

community spirit. So, with that, if I could have  uh KCRT please put up the um presentation. So,   flock safety. The requested action tonight  is going to be to receive a presentation,   approve a transitional contract amendment, and  provide direction to staff regarding the Flock   safety system, the Flock drone as a first  responder program, otherwise known as DFR,   and the Flock automated license plate reader  system, otherwise known as ALPR. Next slide,   please. What is the financial impact? There is  no additional financial impact on this option   or either of the options mentioned. the staff  report. We currently have encumbered funds in   the contract. We have not expent all the  encumbered funds. So, this is a request to   extend time, not add additional funds into the  contract from the original approved contract. Why is the contract amendment needed? Next  slide, please. So, like I stated, there's   $575,000 remaining in the contract balance.  Currently, there are $122,300 encumbered,   and those are pending invoices, meaning we need  we still need to pay those left. Left to to pay   out of that is um $19,000 for the port, 16,000 for  civic center, 78,000 for the police department,   and then a $300,000 dep uh payment for DFR due  in November if we were to continue the program.   54,800 for public works and abatement. Uh and  then additional continued maintenance and support   for flock, CCTV and DFR. Uh if we were again to  continue the program and this amendment would also   the council has an option to either authorize the  turning on of the flock al system, ALPR system or   um choose an option where they can uh leave it  turned off. Next slide please. So what is Flock?  

Flock Safety is an American public safety  technology company that designs, manufactures,   and operates camera systems, hardware, and  software. Most notably, automated license   plate readers, otherwise known as the ALPR, closed  circuit TV cameras, otherwise known as the CCTV,   and autonomous drone systems known as the drone  as a first responder, DFR, and other safety   safety tools used by law enforcement agencies,  neighborhoods, and private businesses. But for our   purposes tonight, we're only going to be talking  about the ALPR automated license plate, the uh   closed caption television CCTV, and the DFR. Those  are the only three buckets of technology that we   have in our contract with Flock. Next slide,  please. So, what is an automated license plate   reader, ALPR? That is a a photo of what it looks  like uh in the presentation. Flock ALPR cameras.   They use computer vision and machine learning to  auton to to automatically capture a still photo   of a vehicle license plate and related vehicle  characteristics such as a make, a model, a color,   or other distinguishing features of that car.  Then provides real-time alerts and in a searchable   database to help law enforcement and security  partners investigate, deter, and solve crime.   And in this case with a closed network it would  just be the Richmond Police Department. What is   what information is captured with Flock ALP's  car? Uh next slide please. What information is   captured with a Flock APR camera? Vehicle license  plate numbers and vehicle colors, descriptions,   and unique identifiers. The photos in this slide  depict um an image of what's taken in a flat   camera. That's essentially what it looks like from  from the photo from behind. And the photo from   front would be the same if it was a front license  plate. And there would be no imagery at all of  

anybody inside the car or any photos taken of  occupants of the vehicle. Next slide, please. What   information is not captured with Flock APR system?  It does not capture any personal identifying   information such as race, gender, etc. It does not  capture facial information i.e. facial recognition   is not part of the program. It does not capture  audio and it does not capture video. Again,   it is a still photo of a vehicle, its description  and its license plate. Next slide, please. So,   where is the flock ALPR data stored? It's uh  cloud-based storage with encryption. All data   is encrypted throughout its life cycle cycle from  capture to transmission to cloud storage. It's   hosted on an Amazon web server otherwise known as  the AWS. Flock specifically uses the AWS or the   Amazon Web Services cloud infrastructure including  AWS CloudGV for data classified under all criminal   justice information service standards. This  type of cloud storage is designed for government   compliance and security. And there are are many  state uh uh uh government agencies that rely on   this storage for their secure data. Uh customer  ownership and access. The data is owned and   controlled by the local customer. In this case,  it would be the city of Richmond such as the   police department or municipal municipality that  contracts with flock. Those customers determine   who can access their data and how long it is  stored and whether it is shared in accordance   with their policy and law. Next slide, please. How  long is flock data retained? Richmond PD policy   section 433 mandates that flock data be purged  every 30 days unless one of the following three  

conditions is met. One, the believed data will  become evidence in a criminal civil action, in   which case that data is stored and it's connected  to an actual criminal investigation and booked   into evidence. that single photo. Um, two, it's  subject to lawful discovery, meaning that someone   in the city the an attorney in the city attorney's  office said, "We have to disclose this particular   photo for some reason." Uh, or three, it's subject  to a lawful mandate to produce records by a judge.   In those cases, we would preserve those records to  produce them according to the court mandate. Next   slide, please. who has access to Richmond's  flock alpr system. Four buckets of people,   uh, sworn personnel, dispatchers, our crime  analysis, and then the same for those that work   at Elserto PD. And why Elsto PD, you might ask?  We have a current, a long-standing with the city   of Elserto where we provide dispatch services,  record management, and computer automated um,   dispatch servicing with them. So, it's best  to think about Elserto and Richmond as sort   of one entity in this case and they're required to  abide by the same policies, the same regulations   that that uh the city of Richmond is um held to.  Next slide, please. So, I want to move and talk   about transparency. This is a a screenshot of the  most recent transparency portal of Richmond PD uh   through the the flock system. And I know it's sort  of a small photo. Hopefully you can see it, but I   just wanted to highlight if you look on the right  hand side, third row from the bottom, vehicles   detected in the last 30 days says zero. And I'm  going to get to that in a moment. I just wanted to   show you uh that that it has I had indeed turned  these cameras off. And we'll talk about that   uh in a moment. But that is the uh this is what  the portal looks like for transparency where it  

discusses the uh what's detected what what uh the  policies are around it how many plates have been   um uh take photos have been taken over uh taken of  and then how many searches have been conducted uh   and what our access policy and what our hot list  policy is. Next slide please. uh continuing in   transparency. This is also what our uh Richmond  PD transparency website looks like hosted on the   city's website. We have a host of transparency  portals that community can go to to see what's   going on in the police department and one of those  is flock safety automated license plate readers.   Within this transparency portal, uh residents  can look at what the police department's policy   is on ALPR technology. they can access the flock  transparency portal from this page and we post   monthly uh flock statistics that that show how  many plates have been scanned, what type of cases   have been utilized for flock and what how has the  department leveraged that technology. It's posted   monthly uh starting from 2023 April of 23 up to I  believe it's uh October of 25. Next slide please.   Uh continuing with transparency, these are some of  my recommended uh updates that should the council   choose to move forward. Um my mandate would be  that all that we would report that I would report   all flock monthly audits to the CPRC. Currently,  the community police review commission is one form   uh one body that exists to help hold the police  department accountable. And my position is this   would be a venue that I think would be appropriate  to have audit reports go to the to the governing  

body, the oversight body of the CPRC so they can  have access to see on a monthly basis the audits   of of any ALPR system whether it's Flock or any  system that we have we can audit to show how the   department is has been using that technology.  The second thing I would recommend is that we   would procure a third-party auditor that would  conduct an audit of the technology that would   report directly to the city council on an annual  basis so that the council has an opportunity   to hear from a third-party auditor. How was the  technology used? Was it in compliance with policy,   department policy and city policy and state law?  Next slide, please. So here is some realities of   how Flock has assisted uh the police department.  This is a a statistical slide that shows from the   implementation of our flocked deployment in  April of 2023. Uh we average somewhere in the   neighborhood. This is specifically looking  at stolen vehicles. If you look at the bar   graph down below it, it's specifically looking  at individuals that we've taken into custody   that were driving stolen vehicles in our city. So,  starting in quarter quarter 2 of 2023, there were   32 individuals taken into custody driving stolen  vehicles. The next quarter there was 43, then 36,   and so on. And you can see the trend. And then the  moment I turned the flock cameras off, November of   25, day one of November 25, uh since then in in  quarter 4 of 25 and in the first quarter of 26,   we've had uh 8 and five respectively. So in  addition, what what that translates to is   approximately a 30% increase in stolen vehicles  since November of 25 in our community. So,  

one thing we know about people who steal cars  is they usually don't steal one. It's usually   one individual or a couple of individuals that  are responsible for multiple stolen cars. So,   when we're able to take an individual into custody  driving a stolen car, we're not just addressing   that one issue. Usually, we're taking them off  the street and it's keeping them from stealing   multiple cars, which is what accounts for the  dramatic change in arrests for stolen vehicles   associated with the increase in stolen vehicles  in our community. And then right above that is   just sort of some overall statistics of 2025. Uh  help with the flock system has directly resulted   in 77 felony arrests, 11 stolen license plates  recovered. Uh 61 vehicles recovered. And what's   significant about that is these are cars we've  been able to recover before they were parted out   and dismantled. And we were able to get these cars  back to the rightful owner in 2025 from January 1   to November 19. Uh and then a total of 319 felony  cases assisted with the use of flock technology,   ALPR technology. Uh next slide, please. Continuing  on with the statistics, these are the if you look   at 25, it's the same. These are the same crime  categories. I just wanted to show you sort of the   trend from 23 when we implemented in April of uh  23 to where we currently were to show you sort of   the trend. At the peak in 24 is when we saw the  most effective use of flock and then it got cut   a little bit early because I turned the cameras  off um before the conclusion of 2025. Next slide   please. So what are uh if you ask what are some of  the uh crime offenses associated with some of the   arrests that I mentioned before? This is a list of  what those those were. Um we utilized um the flock   evidence to resolve um some attempt murders,  hit and runs resulting in death, robberies,  

uh exhibitions of firearm, stalking, carjackings,  carjacking with use of a firearm, DUIs, assault   with a deadly weapon, not a firearm, possession  and purchase of cocaine base for sale, shooting at   inhabited dwelling, embezzle, embezzling uh leased  or rented vehicles, vehicle theft, uh elder abuse,   um possession of stolen vehicles, uh embezzlement,  evading by driving opposite direction in traffic,   and then inflicting corporal injury on a spouse  or or felony domestic violence. As of November   17th to 25 for the year, from January to November,  there were 110,000 stolen plates. I include this   for for council to see just so you understand. Uh  these are cars driving around our city that have   stolen plates. There's a variety of reasons why  somebody might put a stolen plate on their car,   but one that we often see is they're masking that  vehicle. That vehicle is going to be used in the   commission of some other crime and they put a  stolen plate on there so that when an officer   or anybody that takes a photo of that car, it  can't come back to whoever actually owns that car.   comes back to another location and it kind of  throws the investigation off. Uh stolen vehicles,   uh there was 1,723 stolen vehicles that hit  on the system in that time frame and then 251   felony vehicles. Those were cars who entered  the flock system with a felony want on them,   whether they were crimes committed in Richmond  or whether they were crimes committed in other   jurisdictions and they ended up in Richmond. uh  and a total of 184,930 hot list reads. So these   were cars that came through our city that had um  investigations associated with the vehicle, not   people, the vehicle. Uh next slide, please. This  is our current case load. So, as of November, when  

uh November 1, when the cameras shut down, when I  turned them off, uh I've asked our investigations   crime analysts to keep track of that how many  cases have we had since then where the issuance of   or the the the evidence and the leads that flock  cameras provide us or the ALPR technology provides   us um would it have assisted investigators and  response response uh to particular cases. So,   we've had 48 since November. Uh two of those were  homicides. Eight of those were shootings. Um I   don't know if you recall, uh we had a a rash  of shootings in December. Um we had vehicle   descriptions on almost all of those shootings, but  uh was very difficult to track down where where   they were going and where they went from there.  Um and a total of 15 different crime types that   were involved in those 48 cases. And you can see  the list of what those crime types are below. Um,   there is a case that I want to make the council  aware of that that is occurring even tonight   because it's it's it's shocks my own conscience  and I think that would be relevant for the   council to know and understand. We've we've had  an investigation going where we were looking for   a juvenile um human trafficking victim and we had  a without getting really into the investigation   because I believe we're still looking for this  young lady. Her phone was pinging in our city and   she was in a car driving around in our city but we  weren't a we're driving around looking for her uh   with UC units trying to find where this young lady  is because we know who she's with. And if we had   this technology up and running right now, we would  know exactly where that car is right now. Um, so   that's the reality of what some of this technology  brings to the table. This is a case we are  

actively working. I have people out in the field  in our city right now looking for this young lady. Next slide, please. This is a heat map to show  you where flock cameras are currently deployed   in the greater bay area. Um on the right hand side  I have lifted just in contraosta county. These are   the cities in Contracasta County that currently  deploy flock technology. I'm not going to read   them all. You can see the list of of cities.  Uh and then if you look across the Bay Area,   everywhere you see a heat, a circle  represents a coverage area and a city,   a municipal municipality or um a county. And  the the color legend is at the bottom there,   whether it's it's our network, which obviously  none of them are in our network other than   Richmond because we have a closed network. Nobody  else is part of our network. And then you will see   um blue represents these are networks that are  not sharing with other people as well. Uh and   then green are would be networks where pe those  cities have reached out to other municipalities   to provide them open access. Richmond is yellow  because we provide nobody access. Next slide,   please. What is the status of our apr use today?  Well, as I've stated a number of times here,   a number in November of 2025, the chief of police,  myself, I became aware that a previously enabled   feature that was known as the national lookup  feature in the Flock operating system that runs   in the background created a two-way reciprocal  lookup capability. And what that means is the   national lookup feature was a feature that allows  a municipality that has a flock database camera   system to query a complete and full license plate  in the flock database and then it runs a search to  

see if that flock if if that license plate had hit  any other flock camera within their network that   they have across the country. It does not mean  that information was accessed. It just means that   information was accessible. The moment I found  out that was the case, I took immediate action   that very day to decide to turn the cameras off.  Notified the city manager and I notified the city   council. Um, there was no delay. Did not wait for  an investigation. I did not wait to contact Flock   to find out what was going on. I immediately  just turned the cameras off. There had been a   commitment to our community and a commitment to  this council that uh this information was to be   private and we were a closed network and this  was my first understanding that there might be   an issue with that commitment which is why I  chose to turn the cameras off. There's been a   lot made about my decision to turn the cameras off  but I want the council to understand that was my   reason. If there was a problem I didn't want the  problem to continue so I addressed it immediately.   So, what's happened since then? January of 2025,  Flock completely removed the National Lookup   Feature from all California ALPR camera systems.  It is no longer It is no longer a feature that   can even be accessed in the operating system  itself. And I was made aware of this. However,   in the spirit of transparency, I've decided  to continue to keep the ALPR system off until   I've had an opportunity to come sit before this  council and have this discussion tonight. Uh,   next slide, please. Privacy concerns. It is not  lost on me that there are many privacy concerns   related to ALPR technology, but specifically  tonight, we're talking about flock. Um,   Richmond has been in the news, uh, as it relates  to our flock system and and my decision to turn  

the flock cameras off. City of Mountain View has  been in the news. Santa Cruz has been in the news,   Alama County, San Jose, Santa Clara County, Secure  America. This is not a a list that's meant to be   exhaustive. It's a list rather I put together  to really communicate to this council that I   I'm aware of the controversies. I've been reading  about what's going on. and I've been talking to   neighboring cities. Uh I am not sitting on one  side of this um uh topic trying to advocate for   a company. I do not work for Flock. I'm simply  here just to report to you what our system is,   the status of our system, how we use it, and then  provide a recommendation on how to move forward.   Um and I'm sensitive to what the controversies  are, and I understand what the issues at hand are.   Next slide, please. Uh, Flux response. Um, in  compliance with California Senate Bill 34, which   is a bill that's been on the books in California  since 2015, uh, which prohibits any agency in   California from sharing uh, ALPR data with any  other agency outside of the state of California.   uh has decided to force all California entities  who use the flock system to be California   compliant. Up until January of 25, the reliance  for California compliance was placed solely on   the municipal district that had the flock  technology, meaning we should have had that   search feature turned off. At the time of our  training in 2023, it was not clear to us that   by having that feature turned on, it created  a reciprocal relationship. Our understanding   of how that feature worked was we have a closed  network, but if we have this feature turned on,   we are now going to be able to search open  networks because other jurisdictions might not  

have the same values that the city of Richmond.  Well, many other jurisdictions in our country do   not share the same values that we share. So we  were drastically um undertrained I will say at   the onboarding portion of this technology of what  the implications were of that particular feature. Second update that Flock made they updated the  operating system to automatically block all a   all ALPR searches based on specific keyword types.  Meaning when an officer searches the flock system,   they have to meet two standards. One is they have  to have a right to know, meaning they have to be a   swarm personnel, a crime analyst or a dispatcher.  And then number two, they have to have a need to   know. So the right to know and the need to know.  And the need to know is codified in a reason that   they have to document inside flock system as to  here's why I'm searching the data. And upon audits   of flock, what will come out is here's the reasons  that were put in as to why the data was searched.   And that would come out in the flock audits. So  things that that Flock has prohibited that will   that will not allow a search to happen even of our  own data would be if there was anything in there   related to immigration. if there was anything in  there related to customs and border protection,   if there was anything that had to do with Planned  Parenthood, because that's also uh another concern   in California about surveillance technology,  ALPR technology being used to watch people as   they go into, you know, Planned Parenthood  type um reproductive um situations. All of   those things are banned from the network right  now and will not allow a search to take place.   The third update is there's a prohibition in the  system that will allow any California a agency   to establish any sharing relationship  outside of California. And then lastly,  

there's a prohibition on any organization or  federal organization from establishing any sharing   relationship with a California agency. So whether  it's inside California trying to establish out   there the those relationships cannot be created  or if it's an agency outside California seeking   to establish a relationship into California all  of those relationships are prohibited under the   new updates uh as of January of 2025. Next slide  please. Uh so finishing with CCTV with uh AOPR   I'm going to transition to the closed circuit  television which is the second bucket in which   we utilize and leverage uh flock technology CCTV.  Next slide please. Closed circuit TV. Flock safety   CCTV cameras are closed circuit video cameras  that are mounted in fixed location locations.   These cameras are distinct from FOC Flock's  automated license plate reader cameras and   they provide continuous video surveillance  intended to help law enforcement monitor   and protect city assets and public safety in  public spaces. So these cameras, next slide,   please. These cameras are used uh to replace our  aging CCTV system that we've had in the city for   decades. Uh and they monitor public roadways  and they monitor city of Richmond um assets.   uh closed circuit TV what uh uh they do not  participate in the ALPR sharing network. So   it's not a sharing network uh CCTV video is not  sharable. It's not part there's no relationships   that can be st uh created. It's just city of  Richmond continuous closed network for our   own our own um purposes. They do not automatic  they do not automatically share video footage   with other agencies. Like I just expressed, it's  restricted video data to the owning agency unless   manually export it. So somebody would have to  physically download a video and export that video  

into another location in order for it to leave its  database. And then lastly, there is no reciprocal   or automated sharing mechanism for CCTV data,  which I think I've made that clear. Next slide,   please. How long is CCTV video stored? Richmond  PD policy mandates that flock CCTV data be purged   every 30 days just like the ALPR data unless the  same conditions are met as the ALPR data. Number   one, it's believed the data will become evidence  in a criminal or civil action and then it's   stored into evidence. Number two, it's subject to  lawful discovery or number three subject to lawful   mandate to produce records in which case we would  comply with the court orders. Next slide, please.   And this is the last bucket of technology that  we've currently use under the flock contract   and that's called drone as a first responder  or the DFR. And that is a picture of actually   what it looks like right there. Next slide,  please. What is drone as a first responder?   Flock Safety's drone as a first responder program  is a public safety tool that uses autonomous or   quickly deployed drones to support law enforcement  with rapid aerial situational awareness during   active or critical incidents. Drone as a first  responder is a tool that puts eyes in the sky   quickly to give RPD crucial information early  in critical incidents, enhancing safety and   effectiveness without immediately committing  ground resources. Oftent times when we have   a a pilot available to fly the drone as a first  responder, we have eyes in the we have eyes on the   situation before an officer even gets there.  And that informs the officer's decisions as   they're approaching the scene. It's immediate  aerial response. It's live aerial video feed,   meaning we're getting real-time feedback.  Supports decision-m and officer safety. We   can plan and prepare tactically on how to respond  to something before we get there. and it documents  

police activity. It's recorded and it's part of a  permanent record if we need to use it unless it is   uh purged after 30 days. Next slide, please.  This is also some of the benefits of the DFR. It   mitigates the reliance on outside law enforcement  helicopters. I I have been in this city for 17   years and countless times uh as a beat officer,  as a supervisor, as a captain, a manager, and now   as a chief hearing community who does do they do  not like the fact that law enforcement helicopters   will circle over our city. Uh and there's a  variety of reasons why they do that. Number one,   there there there's noise pollution that we can  get rid of by not having a helicopter up there.   and two, a quality of life, the stigma of people  seeing a law enforcement helicopter constantly   overhead um makes people feel a certain way and  I understand that it makes people feel like what   what's going on and what's happening and why is  this helicopter always are over our head. Uh so it   improves the visual quality of life for residents  and visitors, reduces noise pollution and   um uh reduces our need to rely on the sheriff's  department for their helicopter because there are   times when we need to to record aerial view of a  collision scene. We need aerial view of a crime   scene. We're looking for pieces of evidence and we  need to see it from an aerial perspective. Rather   than getting the helicopter up for all those  things, we're able to within our own city manage   those things with a tool that people don't even  notice is even up there. Next slide, please. Also,   DFR contains a standard highdefinition camera,  contains a fleer camera, and these are some photos   of what like the high definitionition camera,  what a fleer camera does. Fleer cameras allow   you to see heat at nighttime. So, if uh you're  looking for somebody or somebody that's lost,   you can see them. Somebody's hiding. Rather  than sending officers into a backyard, we can  

see that they're there. We can call them out to us  rather than of rather than going in and risking a   use of force confrontation. Um it supports  evacuation efforts. we're able to get eyes   into locations where we need to evacuate residents  and understand where they're at and where we need   to deploy people to to uh respond quicker and it  supports search and rescue efforts. Uh next slide,   please. So, why is this contract amendment needed?  Number one, we need to pay for services that have   not yet been invoiced. So, we we need to clear  our current invoices. Number two, we need to   continue providing the city of Richmond with  tools to protect city assets. And number three,   we need to continue providing the Richmond  Police Department with tools to solve, combat,   and detour crime. Next slide, please. So, like  I mentioned, um I turned the cameras, the ALPR   cameras off, and this is a key contract amendment  I wanted to make sure the council was aware of.   Um, I spent a significant amount of time, um,  talking with flock executives all the way up   to I garnering the attention of the the chief  executive officer of the company. Sat down and   had a conversation with him and expressed some  of the frustration that I've had with what led   to the reason why I turned the flock cameras off  in the beginning. learned firsthand some of the   improvements that were made to the system as of  January 2025 and how they they switched gears   as a result of some of those negotiations with  uh the flock executives. They agreed on their   own to give the city of Richmond a key contract  amendment that is not something that is part of   uh what they offer most jurisdictions. I'm not  aware of how many other jurisdictions have this.   I know there's not many if there are any others.  And this is this is the thing I would like   uh council to pay note to. It's it's on uh the  highlighted section of this contract amendment.  

I just want to read it for a moment. says, "In  the event that flock cameras are flock cam in   the event flock cam flock causes an unauthorized  sharing of information, flock shall pay to the   customer, which is the city of Richmond, as  a penalty, the sum of $290,000 per violation.   For purposes of this section, a violation means  a single discrete act or incident of unauthorized   disclosure or access resulting from flocks conduct  irrespective of the volume or number of records,   cameras, or data elements involved in  that same act or incident. In other words,   what we've been able to bring to the table, uh,  if the council so desires to consider would be,   um, a made whole element where the council can  levy a fine through the city attorney's office   should there be a breach of data, a breach  of this contract. There is a direct remedial   option where we can levy a fine against flock  per incident up to $290,000. Next slide, please.   So, if we choose tonight to discontinue the Flock  safety contract, that would mean we would be   working with Flock uh to remove the installed AOPR  cameras, to remove the installed CCT cameras, and   to remove the DFR equipment. That is not something  that would happen overnight. That is something   that would take some time to coordinate. It would  take some time to get flock in um to remove those,   but that would be the ultimate uh resolution um to  that decision. Next slide, please. So, next steps.   This is what I'm proposing as next steps.  Approve a contract amendment through the end   of this year. Why the end of this year? It will  give the council an opportunity to ref I'm not   asking that this contract be extended two, three,  four years. I'm saying to the end of this year,   give the council an opportunity to reflect back  at the end of the year. Bring the item back to see   has Flock held up to their end of the bargain? Has  Richmond PD held up their end of the bargain? Have  

there been any other allegations of anything? uh  and to make a determination whether or not we need   to go in a different direction uh would be a next  step would be to to choose tonight to turn the   flock alpr cameras back on to continue to engage  with community regarding technology concerns to   begin reporting flock safety audits directly  to the CPRC to return to the city council in   December to re-evaluate the flock safety contract  which is something I just mentioned uh and then   also to evaluate and analyze the current RFP and  prepare for future council actions. So, there is   a current RFP I've submitted that's out there.  Um, so should the council decide they want to go   in a different direction, I want to be prepared to  have other options to be back to this council for   consideration. So, that RFP is out. I expect it  to be back by the end of this month and then we   would start the analyzation and the the um looking  at all the proposals immediately after that. Uh,   next slide please. My recommendation is  option A per the staff report to receive   this presentation approve a transitional  contract amendment and provide direction   uh regarding to staff regarding the flock system  flock journals of first responder program and   flock automated license plate reader a PR system  and council that concludes my presentation and I'm   prepared to answer any questions that  you might have. Thank you. Thank you. Before we uh begin questions, I'd like to have  public comment. So, uh public comment is open.   Do we have any speakers? Yes, we have a total of  33 in-person speakers and we have a total of 21   online speakers. As I call your name, please  come forward. line up behind the speaker's  

podium closest to the wall so that you're not  blocking the aisles. Speakers are Kathy Crosby,   Ahmad Anderson, Philip Rosenthal, Don  Gosny, Claudia Citroron, Edward Tuan,   Ben Tero, Oscar Garcia, and Jamon Pcell.  That's the first group. Kathy Cross Just press P press the button. Press the  button. I'm sorry, Mr. Mayor. And or Miss Cler,   could you clarify? We have more than 30  speakers. Would it be reduced to one minute? We have We have 34 and then we  have 21 online. Yeah. So that's   up to the council. Let's take a vote as  to whether or not we want one. So So u we have other items. Is there is there  a motion to limit it to one minute? I'll make a motion to limit uh public comment  to one minute given that we have 54 speakers.   I seconded. Okay. Can we have quick discussion?  I just want to clarify. So per our council rules   the it if we have speakers over 25 speakers it  automatically goes to one minute but outside of   the public comment section at the very beginning  of the agenda outside of that we do have to take   a vote to limit it from two minutes to one.  So this will be our decision to limit it. Just   want to clarify that that's our council rules. I  think that rule applies to open forum. Yeah for   yeah the one minute applies to open forum.  public comment for open. Right. Okay. So,  

this is a vote to reduce public comment time  to from two minutes to one minute. Council   member Brown. Yes. Council member Bana.  Yes. Council member Jimenez. No. Council   member Wilson. No. Vice Mayor Robinson? Yes.  Council member Zapeda? No. Mayor Martinez? No. The motion fails with council members Brown  Bana and Rob Vice Mayor Robinson voting yes. So you'll have two minutes. Press the button.  Press the button, please. Hi, my name is Kathy.   I live in Richmond and I want to voice my support  for our police department and for option A. I   ask you to do real complex work with our police  department that goes beyond slogans, profanity,   cute signs, and online bickering to ensure the  integrity of the data the system captures and   the appropriate use to reduce crime. Boundaries  and guardrails, transparency and accountability.   What reporting and metrics do we need to determine  this is a good investment and a wise use of funds?   If you believe flock will be used primarily  for harm, should we also reject and dismantle   the Richmond Centerfell toll plaza cameras? If  you say the difference is the agency in charge   or the oversight of that data, you are telling  me that you believe our city is not capable of   using technology for efficiency and for safety.  This would make me question what else we are not   capable of doing under your leadership. When  you narrowly characterize the flock cameras   and similar technology as being used primarily for  malent, you perpetuate fear and misunderstanding   in your own citizens. Good leaders do not use fear  to lead. Lead by demonstrating that the city of  

Richmond can do hard things. Be an excellent  and informed steward of this system. Give the   police the tools they need. Hold them to very  high standards of transparency and excellence.   be cleareyed in the complexity of this technology.  The cops are dealing with things that didn't exist   20 and 30 years ago. Um they need they need a  lever and we can provide it to them and we can   expect them to be good stewards if we partner  with them versus turning our backs on them.   Um, the only cities that don't need  police are imaginary, theoretical,   makebelieve cities. And me and the people here  who live in Richmond live in a real complex,   beautiful city. And we'd like to have you  all join us in reality and deal with some   of the things um that the cameras can  leverage. Thank you, Ahmad Anderson. Ahmad Anderson. Good evening, mayor, council,  staff, and community. My name is Ahmad Anderson.   I'm in favor of item W1 in support of the  police and the staff recommendation. Option A,   the reduction of violence enrichment is  not only a moral and community imperative,   it is a clear a clitical first step in creating  the kind of stable, thriving environment needed   for sustainable economic and workforce  development. When communities feel safe,   businesses invest, jobs grow, jobs grow, families  gain opportunity and stability. Public safety is   the foundation that allows everything else such as  education, housing, neighborhood revitalization to   flourish. Earlier we've heard about revitalization  of neighborhoods, potholes, investments, revenue.  

Well, safety is the starter. That is why I want  to begin by recognizing the police department,   despite operating with significant fewer officers  than authorized, still coming here every day,   stepping up and stepping in to protect and serve  all of us in all zip codes. My thought for you is   what do we do if you don't move forward? What  does it look like based upon statistics? Don't   believe him or your lying eyes. Read the data.  Leadership is not based upon the seat that you're   sitting in. It is about taking care of those  in your charge. Thank you, Philip Rosenthal. Thank you, council members. Uh, thank you,  Chief, for actually debunking almost every   myth we're about to hear from the talking  parts of some of the people in this room.   My name is Philip Rosenthal and I live in  Point Richmond where my family of color,   not the right color for some of you, definitely  the right color for others of you, has lived   here and paid taxes for 67 years from the time  when Point Richmond was a haven of drugs and uh   prostitution and all of the bars were biker bros.  I've been talking a lot. My family could never   have reimagined that we would have fewer police  now than ever in the history of the city since   it became industrialized. They could never have  reimagined that we would have approximately half   the number of police officers we had when Chief  Magnus created an internationally recognized um uh   community policing force where people didn't treat  the police officers as if they were criminals.   They assumed they were there to help and they and  we didn't assume that everybody was a criminal. Uh  

my family could never have reimagined that there  would be nearly four,000 instances of dumping in   our city every single year costing taxpayers of  millions of dollars. Nobody in my family could   have reimagined that I need to clean the plunge  park every single morning because of dumping.   and we couldn't have reimagined that we would  have council members that would fight against   the police. The flock system is much better and  I believe the chief because I trust some people.   But it is not perfect. Also not perfect is the  police department. Although some of you would   like to eliminate it, we're not going to just  because it's not perfect. And least of all, what   is not perfect is council members who have million  or multi-million dollar nonprofits that feed in.   We're not going to eliminate them either. Our next  speaker is Don Gazny, followed by Claudia Citrum. Good evening. Let me preface my comments by  saying loudly and clearly, I do not support   ICE. And I am no f fan of that orange-haired  guy and his ditto heads. Every Friday night,   I actually email the White House to let them know  how disappointed I am in everything they say and   do. There's no world where I would support  sharing even the time of day with ICE. But   as for the flock cameras, they provide a valuable  service for our community. With any project, you   need to perform a costbenefit analysis. In this  case, how much benefit does this community derive   as compared to the risk that flock might share  information you don't want shared? Does a state   law forbid the sharing of this information? Yeah,  it does. We heard that. Okay. There is, however,   the risk that when info is shared with other  police departments in Trumpland and East County,  

but that's not limited to to flock drive data.  Anything can happen when you share data. We're   better off using this technology. This is the  wrong time to cut off your nose despite your face. Claudia Citroen. So, um, council earlier fought for 50k for  homelessness. I just want to say we had in   our neighborhoods cars are being stolen. These are  single family cars. People can't go to work. If   they can't go to work, they can't pay their rent.  So, what do you want? Do you want more homeless   people so you can feed your own nonprofits?  Or do you simply want to understand that many   of the people who are against it and understand  it, the media hyped it up, is not informed about   the latest decisions um about what flock can  do. I am against surveillance and I know why,   but I am for safety. This young woman uh Chief  Simmons reported about she was with the pimp. The   pimp took her phone. She tried to get her phone  back. She couldn't. He loaded her in a car. He   threatened her. It was on my block. We have on our  block cars uh speeding off. We have drug dealers   speeding off when they uh hit someone, when  they steal someone's purse. Please listen to   Chief Simmons and understand if there's a mistake,  you make a lot of money. I yield my time. Edward. Hi, I'm Edward Escobar, founder of Coalition  for Community Engagement and the Citizens   Unite Movement. I'm Puerto Rican and Cuban. I've  been to Cuba and I know what socialist extremist  

failed policies look like and that's extreme  human suffering, cities destroyed. I'm standing   here tonight as a recaller, a significant  leader in the successful recall efforts   against the Oakland Mayor Shank Tao and the Alama  County District Attorney Pamela Price. We won by   a supermajority. I've been in the middle of many  political fights before. I know what it looks like   when a community reaches its breaking point and  Richmond is there right now. People in Richmond   are living in fear. Shootings, carjackings, armed  robberies. This is happening in broad daylight,   in front of families, in front of kids. Richmond  residents are tired of pretending this is normal.   It's not. It's chaos. And people are paying  for it with their lives. And while violence   keeps escalating, you're still debating whether  to use tools that other cities already rely on to   stop violent offenders. Automated license  plate reader systems aren't experimental.   They're not controversial anywhere except places  that refuse to face reality. They work. They catch   stolen cars. They identify suspects. They  help stop repeat shooters. They save lives.   Richmond is falling behind because council acts  like doing nothing to improve public safety is   somehow safer. It's not. Doing nothing is what's  killing people. Richmond needs a full citywide   network of safety cameras. Every district, every  hot spot, every corridor where criminals think   they can operate without consequences. No half  measures, no watered down versions. No endless   delays while families are bearing their children.  This is survival. This is about whether people in   Richmond get to live without fear. Let's be  honest, the people of this city are fed up.   They're demanding action. They're demanding real  solutions. They're demanding the same level of   protection the other cities already have. Richmond  cannot be the destination for crime tourism.   Richmond deserves real public safety. Tuan  is our next speaker, followed by Benio.

I'm an Asian and I'm an immigrant who  came to this country not knowing a word   of English. My first job was as a child working  the fields picking tomatoes with other Latinos. oiadinos. And let me tell you what the immigrant community  care about. We care about jobs. We cross the   border. A lot of us, whether it's me on a boat  or them through Mexico to find opportunities and   when we're here, we work very hard for very little  pay. I care about deportations. But the immigrant   community also suffer from crime. If you take away  resources, it's the poor immigrant minorities that   suffer the most, not the rich people up in the  hills. We need safety, too. And if you look at   the data, look, since 2023 in Richmond, when Flock  was implemented solely for public safety, we have   taken 274 criminals off the streets. These are  violent rapists, murderers, people who assault,   domestic violence off the streets. If you don't  stop them, they hurt other people. They're stolen   vehicles. 259, they're taken off the streets.  They're used to commit other crimes and rob   businesses. Each business provides a service for  a community. 911 cases of crime solved. stolen   license plates. This is the reality of public  safety. Look at the data. How many immigrants   have been deported because of this? Zero. How  many residents in Richmond have been deported  

this? Zero. When you go out and say, "Elect me.  Represent me. I'm going to represent you for   public safety." Will you answer to the residents  that you took care of them? Are you just going   to say, "I care about public safety, but I will  not do anything and not look at the data." Mayor,   through if I may, mayor, through you as the chair,  um can we respectfully um given the time and the   number of public speakers, may those members  of staff and consultants that may be here for   item W5, W4, and um W2, can they be released?  and we will continue those items to the next   uh meeting. Yes, it it seems like uh this will  take quite a while. Okay. Thank you. Thank you,   Benio. Uh police sergeant in the city of Richmond  and president of the Richmond Police Officers   Association. Tonight, the decision before  you should not be complicated. Option A is   the only responsible option. For the last several  months, Richmond has been operating with one of   our most effective crime fighting tools turned  off. And the results are exactly what anyone   in law enforcement could have predicted. Vehicle  thefts have increased. Criminal knows. Criminals   know that the cameras are down. And the people  committing crime pay attention to these decisions,   even if this council sometimes doesn't. Before  they were shut off, flock camera system help   Richmond police make arrests, recover stolen  vehicles, and assist homicide investigations.   These cameras don't replace officers. They give  us leads and more importantly they give victims   answers and they give a community a fighting  chance against autotheft, violent crime and   victimization. Let's also be honest about why  these cameras were turned off. Not because they   were harming the public, not because there was  abuse, but because of a configuration issue that   was corrected by the police chief and addressed.  Meanwhile, the people who are actually suffering  

from the shutdown of these things are the Richmond  residents. the people whose cars are stolen,   whose neighborhoods deal with the sideshows and  expect their government to prioritize public   safety and not just talk about it. Option A does  something very reasonable. It restores the cameras   temporarily while safeguards and oversight  can continue. That's a balanced approach.   What is not balanced is allowing ideology to  remove tools that help solve crimes while our   officers are already working with limited  staffing and resources. Council members,   your job is not to make criminals comfortable.  Your job is to make Richmond residents safe. And   tonight, you have an opportunity to do just  exactly that. Support option A. Turn these   cameras back on. Listen to the residents of the  city because I guarantee you, they're going to   listen to this. Maybe not tonight, but later on,  I promise you, they will hear it and they're going   to care about the decision you make. Thank  you. Oscar Garcia, followed by Jamie Pcel. Hi, good evening council. My name is Oscar  Garcia and I am president of the 23rd Merchants   Association and I'm here today to support the  use of flock public safety cameras because our   businesses, our customers, and our neighbors  deserve to feel safe. Flock cameras are now   essential to solve most crimes and RPD should  have this tool available for use. Oakland has   seen crime tumble with the help of their cameras,  while Richmond has seen a 33% increase in car   thefts since our cameras were shut down. We  deserve better here in Richmond. We are We   are also concerned about Richmond businesses being  vulnerable to crime. Considering that all nearby   cities use flock cameras, San Pablo, Elserto use  them as do Oakland and Berkeley. What Mountain   View and other wealthy communities do is not  relevant here because they have low crime rates  

and well-funded police departments. I also would  like to thank RPD Chief Simmons for carefully   protecting our immigrant community as part of  the re-implementation of the flock cameras. He   proactively shut down the cameras when concerns  were raised and he has since implemented many   checks to ensure federal immigration enforcement  does not have access to our flock camera data.   I therefore believe it is possible to provide  sanctuary and safety to our immigrant community.   For too long, immigrants have represented a  very large portion of victims of crime and   the city council needs to do the right  thing and vote for option A. Thank you. Jamie Pcell is our next speaker. Will the  following speakers please come forward and line   up behind the speakers podium closest to the wall?  Melvin Willis, Edith Pastano, Alejandro Valleus,   Nancy Yabara, Alma Gutierrez, Ryan Cousin,  Rocky Chu, Mark Wasber, Cordell Hendler,   and Jasmine Timonss. That's our next group of  speakers. Jamon Purcil. Good evening. First,   I want to thank uh Chief Simmons. This was  incredibly thorough. This showed leadership   and willingness to engage in the community  on this issue. It showed strong leadership,   but as well made sure that there was transparency  and clear policies that are about what building   which is what building trust is about. I want to  express my support for restoring the flock license   plate reader system as it is a practical tool to  help keep us safe and we need tools to help our   understaffed police department right now. Since  the cameras were turned off, we saw what roughly   a 30% increase in vehicle theft, which shows that  these tools make a real difference in preventing   and solving crimes. But as well, the flock camera  cameras focus on vehicles and license plates,  

not people. And they do not use facial  recognition as it was detailed as well.   It is not just important for vehicles, but it is  for protecting the citizens of Richmond such as   the young woman who is being trafficked. But we  know that there are other examples of where the   flock system has been used to help, where there  have been kidnappings and otherwise. I want to   be clear though that that is not in any way saying  I support ICE or I support any sort of uh federal   immigration enforcement. And I want to really  emphasize how incredible it is that our new chief   has made a deal that is unusual and unique to our  city and to no one else in the country right now.   It is about trying to show that he is willing to  go the extra mile and I think that we need to meet   him there. So I know that we can both at the same  time support community trust and effective public   safety tools at the same time and we don't have to  choose one or the other. Please choose option A. Okay. Melvin Willis has left and Edith Pastana  has left. Next speaker is Alejandra Vleos. Alejandra Nance Yabara, Elma Gutierrez, Ryan Cousin,

Hi there, council. Um, first of all, I want  to say it's incredibly heartbreaking to hear   people on the other side of this issue presume  to know what all Richmond residents want and to   presume our situations. Uh, I live in the Iron  Triangle. My car has been broken into multiple   times. My laptop has been stolen. And you know,  I while I am privileged enough to take the hit,   I'm I can't even go to my cousin's wedding this  weekend because I don't have enough money to   support myself. And I am against this item. The  thing is, you can't say that you don't support   ICE and support flock. That's right. Because  the thing is, flock in our jurisdiction maybe   doesn't support uh immigration enforcement,  but in other jurisdictions across the country,   they do. And I'm originally from Texas, and there  has been proof from an independent uh tech media   source that there was a sheriff's office in Texas  that was tracking the license plate of a woman who   had an abortion. So, I want you to know even  though flock will not be abused in our city,   it is being abused elsewhere. And you are  giving your money to a company that does   support immigration enforcement. It might not  be here, but it is in other places. And so,   my question to you is this. If you want  communities to be safe, if you want people   to be able to retrieve their stolen cars, at  the very least, can we find another option that   is not flock? It's just there's got to be another  option. But I mean, I don't support surveillance,   but we don't even have to argue that point.  It is the fact that it is flock. Let's argue   on that point, right? So, no, you cannot  come up here and say you do not support ICE,  

but you support keeping people safe with flock. I  don't buy it. It's not true. Thank you, Rocky Chu. Good evening, city council. Uh, my name is Rocky.  Um, I'm an Asian guy and I live right here in   Richmond. As a resident of District 2, I'm with  the AsianPacific Environmental Network and I live   and care for my immigrant mom and we live in our  neighborhood where uh we've uh for the the four   over four years we live there, we've experienced  safety and good quality of life because of the   life in firming investments that the city council  have made uh which includes but not limited to   better infrastructure, well-maintained parks, uh  more jobs, and we should be doing more of that.   Uh, and that's why I'm calling on the city  council to vote to end their contract on   all of the flock products. Uh, Richmond's  current efforts towards public safety are   working despite the extreme fear-mongering that  we've been hearing uh throughout the night. Uh,   Richmond have the lowest homicide rates in the  city's history. And although that still needs   there still needs more work to be done and um  we need more work to be done to get to zero uh   there's no need to jeopardize our safety and our  privacy through the unjust mass surveillance of   Richmond residents or or other residents for that  matter. Additionally, I'm personally concerned   about the historic and continued potential  breach in data regarding the flock surveillance   program in Richmond. the the risk to our local  information being exposed to uh agencies such as   ICE that operate outside of the city's values  is a violation of trust we place in our local   government. Of course, we can further improve  public safety. Uh but that comes with building   relationship and trust with the community and not  with expensive surveillance tools from a private   corporation that governments or agencies outside  of our own use for possible nefarious purposes.  

For that reason, I urge you all to vote no to  the flock surveillance contract. Mark Wasber. My god. I said I I said I don't care if you have  flock, license plate readers, helicopters, drones,   or anything. You got the CIA. I could care  less. As long as you keep the public safe,   that's all that matters. And these people think  that you're going to stop the federal government   for going in and getting the information. You  are wrong. Cuz the only thing they have to do   is get a court order. They'll get all the  information you they need. And you're not   going to stop ICE. You're not going to stop the  federal government for enforceable constitutional   immigration laws. You're not going to do it. You  don't have an authority to do it. And it's not   going to be stopped. The Richmond PD is not  going to stop the federal government. So you   guys are just wasting your time because I know  for a fact that this city council defunded the   police. They stopped the police checkpoints  that was giving illegal immigrants fraudul   ID cards telling the police don't do this and  don't do that cuz you're cracking down on our   illegal immigrants. Well, that's just  too bad because when ICE comes in here,   you will be deported because you  come in my country illegally,   you will be deported and there's nothing you  can do. It's just bunch of stupid politics and   you think you're going to support some type of  uh ordinance to stop ICE from coming in here,   you are dead wrong because once the White House  gets this information, I'll guarantee you Trump   will have ICE swarming all over Richmond. And  there's nothing you can do. And you can kiss  

40% of your Latino community goodbye. This is a  bunch of stupid politics. And you guys are just   being stupid and hope that we will totally vote  you people out cuz you have no business being in   our government if you're going to aid in betting  criminals from the law. That is not your job to   do. And you have no right being in my government.  So, we're going to get you out. Cordial Hendler. Cordell Hindler. I know, right? Please start. Yeah. What you  looking at me for? So, uh, good evening,   uh, mayor, council. Um, in the interest of time,  I'll just say Cordell Hanland. I'm a Richmond   resident. So, thank you, uh, Chief Simmons for  that presentation. So, I really had much to say,   but I think everything was all said and I'm like,  okay, option A or option B. And I'm thinking like,   I just go with what what the council is  proposing. So, I'll just leave it at that.   Our next speaker is Jasmine Timonss. And will  the following individuals please come forward,   light up behind the speaker's podium? We  need Hold on one second, please. Let's see.   Crescent Diamond, Kathleen Katherine Lee, Hope  Dixon, Pedro Bernal, Carlos Warz, Natalie Sto,   Andrew Melendez, Helen Hagerson, Ray Wendle,  and Julie Salomon. Jasmine. Hi, good evening.  

My name is Jasmine. I am a resident of Richmond  District 2 and I am here tonight to ask the city   council members to vote no on and not to renew the  contract with flock. I feel strongly that people   who live here in Richmond, visitors who come in to  Richmond to shop and everything else um should be   able to be here without being digitally tracked,  especially by a system that has multiple and   proven security issues and concerns. Um and that's  basically what I I have to say except I have two   questions which I would please ask you to consider  before making your decision. Uh the first one is   um will the flock using the flock system open  us up to litigation the way it has in other   cities and is that something that we need to  consider? And two, doesn't using flock violate   um our agreement and promises that we made when  we became a sanctuary city for our immigrant   community? Something to consider. Thank  you. Have a good night. Crescent Diamond. Hi, my name is Crescent Diamond and I'm a resident  and homeowner in District 1 and a member of   Reimagine Richmond. I want to talk about why our  community needs you to vote to reject both options   and end the contract with all flock products.  This surveillance poses an extreme extreme risk   to our immigrant community, our LGBTQ community,  our black community. Because let's be clear,   ICE is not only targeting community members  who are undocumented. They are targeting   African-Americans. They are targeting US citizens.  They are murdering people in the streets. and   who knows who they will go after next. From  an article about a lawsuit against the city   of Eugene around their use of flock, quote,  "Surveillance through the use of technology  

like flock cameras presents a dangerous threat to  every Oregonian's privacy and rights to be free   from invasive and unjustified government searches  into our personal lives." Kelly Simon, the ACLU   of Oregon's legal director, said in a statement,  "The concern is heightened by the extreme levels   of federal aggression being currently directed at  immigrants, transgender people, black and brown   people, and people exercising their First  Amendment rights. I don't know about you,   but I don't trust the federal government to  follow the law at this point in history."   I also want to highlight some of the seemingly  misleading statistics provided uh in the report um   to show the success of flock in aiding preventing  crime and recovering assets. Um the agenda report   states an increase in vehicle thefts since  the deactivation of Flock cameras in November,   but that stat is not directly related to  Flock's use as a surveillance system. Was   there a significant number of stolen vehicle  recoveries in the months that flock was still   active as a result? Um, and it doesn't seem to  include that. So, I would ask you to look at   the report. Is it just a read of Your time  is expired. Next speaker, Katherine Lee. Hi, Mayor Martinez and members of the city  council. My name is Katherine Lee and I am   a District 3 resident. I'm also the youth  organizer at AsianPacific Environmental   Network. Richmond residents already  experience deep distrust in government   and local police authority. Expanding flock  surveillance systems will only widen that gap.   At a time when Richmond is experiencing the  lowest homicide rates in the city's history,   investing in expanded surveillance feels  less about safety and more about monitoring  

our Richmond residents. This is especially  concerning in the current current climate when   many of our immigrant immigrant families and  neighbors are living in fear of deportation.   Instead of investing in tools that surveil  residents, I encourage the city and Richmond   Police Department to shift their focus on  partnering with our Richmond community to   develop public safety solutions rooted in trust  and accountability. Thank you. Hope Dixon. Good evening, Mayor and Council members. Thank  you for the opportunity to speak tonight. My   name is Hope Dixon. Um, and I live in district  2. I'm asking the council and especially my   district representative, Cesar Zapeda, to vote  no on renewing the city council's flock camera   group. Uh, Richmond is a beautiful city full  of pride and purpose. We're a community that   learns and evolves when we see how something  is actually working in practice. And what we   are learning about fleto technology should give  us all significant pause. I don't know if you've   read the articles, but sh uh flock technology was  introduced as a tool for local crime prevention,   but over time the data expands, the network grows,  and access to information about our community   spreads far beyond the place where these cameras  were first installed. This is mass surveillance,   and systems like this never stay limited to their  original purpose. Right now, many of us do not   trust the federal government, especially when it  comes to immigration enforcement. So we cannot   safely build with a tool designed around data  sharing. Reporting and public records show that   flock data has been searched by law enforcement  in connection with protest sometimes with nothing   more written in the search field than the word  protest. I am so glad to have heard really I am um   for all your work and your research. Um I am very  grateful uh to our new chief because it does look   like very much considered all the issues although  we may not have found the same conclusion. Um,  

community is safety is something that everybody  in Richmond deserves, but real safety cannot come   from systems that track people's movements and  put immigrant families and peaceful protesters   at risk. Flock says cities are debating their  technology because of trust. They're right.   The reality is this. Trust is exactly what this  technology erodess in our community and for our   community council. Please consider. We can do  better than this. We can find a different tool.   I urge the council to vote no on renewing  the flap contract. Thank you, Pedro Bernal. Uh, good evening, council members  and staff. My name is Pedro Bernol,   and I'm a community organizer  with the Safe Return Project.   Um, we strongly oppose expanding or continuing a  flock safety contract in item W1, especially the   drone as a first responder program in reliance to  the CCTV system. Drones flying over our neighbors   is a move in the wrong direction. It will create  fear instead of trust, and it will intimidate   communities instead of making them feel secure.  Spying on our Richmond residents is not policing.   Instead, it's a violation of privacy. on CCTV.  As a sanctuary city, we cannot risk our data   being used directly or indirectly for the federal  immigration enforcement safeguard fails report to   show flock data aiding ICE actions elsewhere. Uh  and yeah, that's it. Thank you. Carlos Warris. Good evening, uh mayor and council members.  My name is Carlos and I'm with Reimagine   Richmond. I'm speaking today to express my  concern about extending the Flock safety   uh contract. Automated license plate reader  systems like Flock do more than help solve  

crimes. They collect and store large amounts of  data about people's movement across the city.   Every time a car passes one of these cameras,  uh, that one one every time a car passes on   one of these cameras, that information could be  logged, stored, and searched later. That raises   serious questions about privacy, oversight,  and how this data can be used in the future.   These systems can allow data sharing with outside  agencies, which means information about Richmond   residents and visitors may be uh assessed beyond  our city's control. For many community members,   especially immigrant families and those already  and already overpoliced, this type of surveillance   creates fear rather than safety. Public safety  should mean normalizing constant surveillance of   our neighborhoods. Richmond deserves safety  solutions that build trust, transparency,   and accountability, not technologies that monitor  our daily movements. And since we want to talk   about data, data shows that these cameras don't  prevent crime. For these reasons, I urge the   council to vote uh no on the extension of the of  the flock safety contract. Thank you, Natalia Sto. Hello everyone. I am Natalia, a community  organizer with Bria Imagine Richmond. I   am here to speak in opposition of W1 flock safety  contract extension. Not only for the many reasons   that we'll hear during public comment, but also  because it is a threat against women abortion   rights. Data collection by law enforcement is  being exploited, shared freely across our country,   and labeled as investigation to justify the  tracking of women into different states to get   a legal abortion documents. There is documents of  over 1,800 agencies that have deployed AL alprs,  

but at least 4,000 agencies are able  to run searches through some agencies   and flocks networks nationwide. Flock database  uh database is being shared. Uh motherhood is   under the mother board purchase data over 600  Planned Parenthood facilities across the US. How can you support our immigrant community and  your system is easily hackable and information   has been sold? I am tired and we are tired of  being watched, surveiled and instilled fear. No flock, no ice, no surveillance.  Thank you, Andrew Melendez. All right. Thank you. Good evening, mayor and  city council. My name is Andrew Melendez.   I'm a lifelong Richmond resident and community  organizer with Reimatch Enrichment. I'm speaking   tonight in opposition to the proposal to extend  the city's contract with Flock and Richmond.   I was really pleased to hear last year that our  police chief Simmons uh made the great decision   to deactivate Richmond's flock cameras due to  security concerns. And that decision of course was   following concerns from so many in our community  about um immigration data being accessed by Flock   as well as vulnerabilities within access uh to  Flock data as well. So when I heard that the Flock   license plate readers, the drones, and the CCTV  will potentially be brought back into our streets,   I immediately think of the many immigrant  residents in our community who are put at risk   because of the decisions that our council will  make tonight. Continuing a contract with Flock is   a clear violation of our sanctuary city ordinance.  Under our ordinance, the city of Richmond is   prohibited from contracting with companies  who sell data to ICE. And Flock has a long and  

documented track record of doing this nationwide.  This alone should be justification enough to say   no to this contract. Flock cameras have also  been misused by federal agents who have looked   through local databases for information about  community members nationwide citing justifications   like investigations. Even as the Richmond Police  Department opts out of the data sharing with ICE,   they still share information with the Elsto  Police Department, which is not a sanctuary city.   And so that makes it a big vulnerability for our  immigrant community to be potentially targeted as   well. So allowing flock back onto our streets is  allowing that backdoor access for federal agents   to attack our immigrant community who are already  so fearful of ICE activity happening across the   country and in our city. And so I ask the council  tonight to vote no on either option and to stand   with our immigrant communities and stand with our  communities. I know that this council has stood by   our immigrant communities in the past and I have  faith that tonight our council will continue to   protect the livelihoods of our community here in  Richmond. Thank you for your time. Helen Hagerson. Good evening. My name is Helen Hagerson. I'm  a member of Reimagine Richmond and I'm here to   urge you to vote no on extending the contract  with Flock. Flock has shown repeatedly across the   nation that they are an organization that cannot  be trusted with the safety of our community.   The software is hackable, has dozens of  vulnerabilities that they are not transparent   about or accountable for, and investigators  have found Flock Portal Access credentials on   the dark web being sold for only $120. One user  found a live stream to a children's playground,   showing how it can be used as a tool for human  trafficking. Data violation through hacking would  

not be covered in the contract amendment with  Flock and would put the residents and the city of   Richmond at major risk. Right now in the Bay Area,  San Jose and Oakland are both being sued because   Flock's mass warrantless tracking is a violation  of the Fourth Amendment right to reasonable   expectation of privacy. Please protect the privacy  and safety of our community and do not leave the   city vulnerable to an expensive lawsuit by voting  no on any work with flock. Thank you. Uh mayor,   would you like to extend the meeting now? Yes. I  need a motion to extend the meeting. I'll make a   motion to extend the meeting to the end of this  item. Okay, I second that. So, we have a motion   to extend to the end of this item. Okay. Um,  Council Member Brown, yes. Council member Bana,   yes. Council member Jimenez, yes. Council  member Wilson, yes. Vice Mayor Robinson,   yes. Council member Zepeden, yes. And Mayor  Martinez, yes. The vote is unanimous. Ray Wendell. Good evening, city council. My name is Raymond  Wendell and I'm a member of Reimagine Richmond   and I would really like to urge you to think  seriously about the impacts this agenda item   has on personal privacy. There's a lot at  stake, especially at this moment of history   when our immigrant communities are under attack,  reproductive freedom is being rolled back at   breakneck speed and our precious civil liberties  are severely threatened. This is not the time to   double down on surveillance of the community.  I the the presentation was very thorough. I   would have liked to hear a little bit more about  the drone program, which is terrifying. Um so,  

uh this is a little bit of a side note,  but I'm confused about whether this is a   different drone than the one and I know we have  AB481. The the um report on that is coming up,   so maybe I'll learn more. But, uh there was there  was already a drone. Is this a different drone?   I'm hoping that gets clarified. Um, and is this  drone um in compliance with the the AB481 policy?   Um, but going beyond that, I'm just really deeply  concerned about the invasion of privacy that's   entailed with this type of drone, which is quite  literally a weapon of war um to surveil the people   of Richmond. The specs of the drone uh that are  listed in the agenda report would be impressive   if they weren't so alarming that it can fly  400 feet in the air and zoom in 2,000 ft. So,   in other words, we would have no idea that the  drone is present. And I think this was actually   covered in the presentation. No one is going to  know it's there. It's just surveilling them. Um it   can also apparently through the heat map sensor,  whatever it is, see somebody who's in hiding. So,   does that mean it can see people in their houses?  What about the fourth amendment? Um, yes. So,   this is treating Richmond like a war zone. In  conclusion, please deflock Richmond. The costs   of continuing this program to personal privacy,  civil liberties, and safety of our vulnerable   population. Your time is expired. Are too great.  Our next speaker, our next speaker is Julie   Solomon. And the following individuals, please  come forward. Nate Lans Lonzo, Halis Stevens,   and Irene Wawa will be our last inerson speaker.  Julie Solomon. Hi, my name is Julie Salomon. Um,   I'm a member of Reimagine Richmond and I've lived  in Richmond for a decade. Um, I want to appreciate   uh to thank the chief for coming and giving  his very thorough presentation. I also want  

to thank him for turning off these cameras the  moment we learned that there was a problem.   your community appreciates your fast action on  that. Um, you know, earlier I was listening to   the president of the Richmond Police Officers  Union and he was saying that the the the the   chief didn't make that decision to turn the  cameras off because there had been any abuse of   the flock cameras. And I hope that this council  knows that that's just plain wrong. In 2023,   Elserto Police Department restricted their flock  settings so that federal agencies could not access   that data. That's what flock told the El Certo  Police Department. What they found out later was   that in fact for a multi-year period, despite  Elserto Police Department turning off access to   those federal agencies, those federal agencies  had access anyway because Flock screwed up.   And when they were asked about it, Flock said,  "Oh, sorry. It was a technical error and they   assure us it won't happen again. And I again I  appreciate our chief going and getting a deal   with them that shows if it happens again that  they're going to pay us some amount of money.   But how can we possibly take their word for it?  How can we even know? They flock is the one that   holds this data. Flock is the one that runs this  database. And what we know what we've seen Flock   do in other Bay Area counties is fail to live  up to what they are contracted to do. They told   El Certo they weren't giving federal agencies  access. That was that was a lie. That was not   true. And now Elserto is open to who knows how  many lawsuits based on that. It wasn't Elserto   Police Department's fault. It's Flock's fault. And  so what the community is trying to say to you is   Flock cannot be trusted. Don't take our word for  it. Look at what they've been doing in the Bay   Area. The the chief during his presentation  said, "Think of Elserto and Richmond. Your  

time is expired." And I urge you to do the same.  Your time is expired, Mad Speaker. Nate Lonzo. Good evening, mayor and city council members. My  name is Nate Lonzo. I'm a police sergeant with   the Richmond Police Department, and you guys need  to vote yes on option A. People here have voiced   their concerns about public safety. Merchants,  citizens, other citizens, other citizens have   voiced their concerns about being surveiled. Let  me put those fears to rest. If you're a citizen of   Richmond, we're not surveilling you. We're not  watching you move around the city. If you're a   cit a citizen of Richmond or a visitor to the city  of Richmond and you commit crime, we will surveil   you and we will find you and we will bring you to  justice. You need to trust Chief Simmons to lead   the police department to make decisions when it  comes to public safety because he is the expert.   People have talked about how Richmond has  experienced the lowest homicide rate in its   history. Well, I was an officer here when  Richmond was the seventh most dangerous   city in the United States. When 52 homicides  were occurring and 385 plus shootings were   occurring and we didn't have tools like Flock  and we had more officers than we have now.  

Flock is a force multiplier. If you guys  want us to go back to being one of the most   dangerous cities in the United States, ignore the  chief's recommendation. Thank you, Elsa Stevens. I I need a favor. Can I have my friends and   people who agree with me to stand  behind me and not the opposition? You have two minutes, ma'am. Can this happen? No. Speak. You have two minutes. Elsa, can can  the for Okay, I'm going to start your time. Stevens, I need to start your time. We have  21 speakers online waiting to speak. I mean,   if you're feeling if if you want a distance  around you, I think that's fine. But you   can't control what the the signs behind you  or the people who are standing behind you,   whe what whether whether they're in favor of this  or not, I think perhaps everybody should sit down. Okay, I'm ready to speak now. In my youth, I  worked the stolen vehicle department for San   Francisco PD. The stolen auto division can be the  the central nervous system of law enforcement. I'm an NI NCIS fan. I want our Richmond  police to have all the latest toys,  

but federal agencies like ICE have started to  hack flock data. ICE is not law enforcement.   They use stolen plates. Today, ICE specializes  in human traffic harvesting. Over 4,400 detainees   in ICE concentration camps were kept in prison  even after the courts had freed them. ICE does   this so Trump's friends can continue to enjoy  obscene profits off of our tax dollars. Don't   trust flock. Not while Trump is president.  Our last in-person speaker is Irene Wawa. Okay. Hi, my name is Irene Weiba and I live  in Richmond in district 6. Um, I am opposed   to the um extension of the flock contract. Uh,  I'm concerned for the safety of our community   and cannot trust this private company not to  sell our data and cannot trust them to adhere   to our sanctuary city policy. Um this system  is so powerful as um as the chief police has   uh presented and in the wrong hands. Um it can  provide so much information regardless of our  

intent of our intentions. Um, I appreciate the  efforts uh made um to include a penalty in the   um in the contract if uh flock violates the terms  of the contract. But um I argue that no amount   of money is worth the safety of our community  members. Uh please protect us, your constituents,   um and vote to end the flaw contract. That was our  last inerson speaker. Now we'll move to the online   speakers. We have 23 speakers. Okay. And the  first group of speakers are Manny Marisol Gomez,   Sonia's iPhone, Brian Hoffer, Edith Pastano,  Emily Ross, Lorraine Resza, Willie Robinson,   a user with the name Multicultural Institute, and  Chris Moore. Please be ready to unmute yourself   when your name is called. Manny, you'll have two  minutes to speak. You can go ahead and start. Can you guys hear me? Yes. Go ahead. All right.  Hello, city council. My name is Manny. I am the   chair of the Latino Affairs Commission  for the County of Santa Cruz. However,   I am not speaking on behalf of the commission. I'm  calling in because my responsibility to protect my   constituents demands me to act. Your decisions  here don't just impact your constituents,   but also extend to impacting my constituents,  specifically my constituents in South Santa Cruz   County. These cameras are not just license plate  readers. Flock's very own patent states that there   are neural networks for identifying people based  on their height and weight, race, and gender,   and even the clothes and accessories worn, like  backpacks. There are also neural networks for   identifying bicycles and even animals. I want  to make it very clear why this technology is  

dangerous. According to the 2021 DHS policy  regarding ALPR cameras, all ALPR vendors are   required to prevent leaving any trail of federal  immigration enforcement agents looking into our   data except in audit logs made available only to  immigration enforcement. Meaning that any audit   logs we ask for would produce a false negative.  The only reason we have had we have discovered   these types of cameras being used for immigration  enforcement is because of what we call side door   searches conducted in violation of both SB34 and  SB54. This technology is actively being used right   now to hunt down our neighbors. In Chicago, a  teacher named Marimar Martinez was shot five   times by border patrol. Discovery process in court  has revealed that the agents who shot her not only   texted each other saying, "I fired five shots.  She has seven holes. Put that in your book, boys.   But that they also tracked her using license plate  reader technology. One of these exploited cameras   is live streaming to the internet unencrypted  a children's playground in the Bay Area,   meaning any children near that playground are put  at risk of falling victim to human trafficking. I   kindly ask that you join the cities of Santa Cruz,  Mountain View, Los Altos Hills, and the county of   Santa Clara in cancing your relationship with  Flock. Thank you. Thank you. The next speaker   is Mayor Soul Gomez. You can go ahead and start.  Good evening, mayor and members of city council.   My name is Marty Soul and I am a Richmond resident  residing in district 3 and a member of Reimagine   Richmond. As an active member and a small business  owner of our community, I am deeply concerned of   the fear our residents have expressed that deeply  impacts their everyday life and safety. We call on   the leadership of Richmond City Council to end our  city's flock contract. The flock company cannot be   trusted and we as community members place trust on  our local government to uphold the responsibility   to protect and not violate our privacy and  personal data. We cannot continue to implement  

policies that impact the social determinance of  our most vulnerable community members, black,   brown, indigenous, LGBTQ and undocumented and  documented immigrants. Especially as racial   profiling increases in this country, I am not  using the stories and experiences of of others.   I am using my own experience as a queer w woman,  as a resident of Richmond, and as someone who is   in connection with neighbors, and as a Mexican  immigrant. Please consider what safety truly   means. Is it using city budget to properly fund  city-wide surveillance that will continue to lead   to safety and economic instability? Or is it using  our budget to provide assistance necessary for   our community members to thrive? We do not need  funding for drones. As mentioned earlier in this   very session, we need foundational infrastructure  buildup, street cleanup, housing for the unhoused,   lights on Carlson. Mass surveillance is not  public safety. Don't be fooled into giving   up your right to privacy over the illusion of  safety. We don't know who can hack it into this   technology and use it for the wrong reasons. With  Elserto not having a sanctuary city ordinance,   how can we be sure our undocumented immigrant  neighbors will be protected? Our constitutional   rights keep getting asked left and right by this  federal administration. We cannot sacrifice our   basic constitutional rights to privacy here at  home. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Next   speaker is Sonia. If you'll please state your  name for the record, you can go ahead and start.   Um hello. Can you hear me? Yes. Go ahead. My name  is Sonia Decker and I'm a Richmond resident. Um,   and I urge council to vote no on this item and  to divest from Flock. Flock has been proven to   be an untrustworthy corporation and a bad actor.  We can't trust that they will make the changes   that they say they're going to make. Their  values are not our values. Why would we partner   with a corporation that we think we may have to  levy allegations against when we could cut the  

contract with them now and protect our residents  in advance? Many nearby cities have cut ties with   Flock because it puts residents and cities at  risk and I urge Richmond to do the same. Flock   violates our constitutional rights. They have  had multiple data breaches and frequently work   with ICE and other federal agencies. Partnering  with them violates our sanctuary city ordinance,   spreads fear, and puts our immigrant community  members at risk. This council has demonstrated   a strong commitment to keeping immigrants  in Richmond safe and I urge you to continue   doing so now. You've also demonstrated a strong  commitment to enhancing public safety for all.   Crime is not prevented by over surveillance and  criminalization. It is prevented by meeting the   underlying needs of people so that they can feel  safe and thrive, including investing in housing,   food, education, and health care. You have been  doing these things and it is paying off. Crime is   down in Richmond. Please continue to invest  in the well-being of people and build trust   with community members instead of investing in  a system that violates our rights and spreads   fear. Please listen to Richmond residents. We do  not want or need Flock. Please cut the contract   with Flock. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker  is Brian Hoffer. You can go ahead and start. Good evening, mayor and council members. Brian  Hoer on behalf of Secure Justice. Some of our   members work, live, and play enrichment. I thank  Chief Simmons for voicing his concerns about   flock. I ask that you vote no on this proposal  for the reasons outlined in our letter. I have   worked on surveillance policy for 12 years, and  in that time, no technology vendor has had a year   as scandalridden as Flock. We've confirmed 40  terminated contracts, most within the past six   months, as governments learn more about Flock's  corporate conduct. In California, Santa Clara   County, Mountain View, Ventura, Los Altos Hills,  and Santa Cruz have all recently determined that  

continuing to do business with Flock is not in  their best interest. There are other vendors.   SP34 prohibits sharing ALPR data without a state  agencies. Based on records the city provided to   us yesterday, more than 2700 non-cal California  agencies have as accessed Richmond's data tens   of thousands of times. Each violation carries a  potential minimum statutory penalty of $2,500,   meaning your exposure is running into the tens  of millions of dollars. Flock itself is currently   facing four class action lawsuits, including one  in Contraosta Superior just filed two weeks ago.   There are additional concerns regarding Richmond's  sanctuary contracting ordinance. In 2023,   Flock certified under penalty of perjury that  it did not and would not provide ALPR data to   ICE in order to obtain the original contract.  We now know that representation was false and   the company did not notify the city that it  provided data to ICE during the contract term   as required by the ordinance. That ordinance  carries a misdemeanor penalty and that contract   should be voided. Because Richmond has not  been paying attention until after the harm   has occurred. Your current AOPR contract  allows Flock to share your data with any   third party at Flock's discretion. Taking  together these issues expose Richmond to   serious legal and policy risks. But tonight,  you have an opportunity to address those risks   by voting no on this proposal and exploring  another solution. Thank you for listening.   Thank you. The next speaker is Edith  Pastano. You can go ahead and start. Hi. Can you all hear me? Yes. Hi. Um, sorry. Good  evening, council members and mayor, city staff,   and community. My name is Edith Pastano. I'm a  Richmond resident for I want to say a little bit   more than 35 years. Basically all my life. I'm a  member of ACE and I live in district 5. Um I'm all  

for community safety when it looks like a better  way for everyone in my community to feel quote   unquote safe because um safe can look different  for different people. Um and so um what I mean   by that is where plans and programs are actively  keeping youth off of the street and away from mass   industrial incarceration pipelines. However, if  community safety means that the federal government   without local jurisdiction without the local  jurisdictions's knowledge can just attain data   through the flock system program and it's used to  carry out further separation of families by the   federal government. Then um all at the same time  while having passed the sanctuary policy back in   2018 seems not only conflicting but also not the  best way to fight crime. More surveillance does   not equal more safety. It only leads to further  criminalization of black and brown people. Um   so more funding for youth programs and safety  nets as well as spaces for black and brown youth   um from the lens of and the vision of racial  justice are just the the the starting points   to a better and a safer community. Um, so I urge  the council today to please suspend this contract   with Flock Systems and please um hone into better  ways of addressing issues uh around safety in our   community. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next  speaker is Emily Ross. You can go ahead and start. Good evening, council and community. My  name is Emily Ross. I'm a Richmond resident.   I'm going to say on the front end that my hope  is you do not renew this contract in any form. Um   wanted to start with the comments about how people  are against surveillance but for this program. Um  

Flock is a set of tools for mass surveillance.  That's a literal descriptor for their products.   It's not an opinion. Um I listen closely to  the chief's presentation. Thank you for that.   and the small batch of speakers at the beginning.  I heard a lot about how helpful it is. I heard   a lot about, you know, don't worry, it's not  dangerous, but the benefits of this technology   seem largely speculative, while the harms seem  well documented. Flock has a demonstrated history   of misleading communities such as jurisdictions  like ours about their data sharing practices. It's   regularly accessed by ICE. It's easily hackable.  Inaccuracies with their system have resulted   in wrongful arrests. It is very open to abuse by  officers and it leaves us vulnerable to litigation   given the all of the shortcomings with the system.  The data shared in this presentation implies flock   reduces crime but doesn't actually show that.  Um, speaking specifically about the license plate   readers, the vehicle theft data includes non-flock  related um, arrests and just wanted to provide a   pro a quick anecdotal data point. I know a few  people who have had their cars stolen recently,   not from Richmond but neighboring communities who  utilize flock products. All of them had their cars   recovered, none via some high-tech investigation,  but good old-fashioned parking enforcement. Uh,   your time has expired. Thank you. The next speaker  is Lorraine Resza. You can go ahead and start. Can you hear me? Yes. Okay. Hi, my name is  Lorraine Resa, Richmond resident. Here to strongly  

urge all council members and the mayor to vote  no to not extend the contract with Flock Group,   Inc. to use drones, CCTV, and ALPR as a city  surveillance. We know this tech is actively   being used by ICE and DHS to hunt down immigrants  across the country. Just because we have some   leaders here right now that have values to protect  our most vulnerable neighbors, it doesn't mean it   will always be the case. Need I remind you,  having flocked drones, ALPRs, and CCTV will   violate both the California State Sanctuary Act 54  and Richmond's own sanctuary city ordinance, which   specifically prohibits Richmond from contracting  with companies who sell data to ICE. Flock has   done this several times. And don't trust a closed  network. Not only is it hackable in 30 seconds,   but all features that are supposedly turned off  for our city can easily be turned back on. People   earlier said that we need to be realistic and we  need to be safer. Have you had your head stuck   in the sand not seeing what's happening in LA,  Chicago, and Minneapolis? You think we're immune   to that? We know ICE and DHS are accessing Flock's  data, and they're here and active in the Bay as we   speak. If you care about our immigrant neighbors,  then we need to limit surveillance in our city.   Flock has proven it's dangerous, especially  against immigrants and anyone perceived as such,   which includes most of Richmond, including me.  Based on community outreach efforts I'm a part of,   our local business owners have seen drops in  patronage specifically because people are scared   to be in public space. More surveillance can  increase this fear instead of making them feel   protected. Instead, our city needs to invest  in resourcing our various communities so they   don't feel it's necessary to commit crimes like  Maris before me said and like Rock, our community   responders that we have. Please, I plead with  you as a resident who works daily to protect   our immigrant neighbors. Do not help Richmond  be another city that allows more surveillance.  

Vote no on W1. Thank you. The next speaker is  Willie Robinson. You can go ahead and start.   Yes. Good evening, uh, mayor, honorable council  members, uh, the city manager, and the police   chief. Uh, I'm Willie Robinson, president of  the Richmond branch, NACP. And I am here to add   the support to the recommendation coming from the  police chief, and urge the council to follow that   recommendation. We are most certainly in a time  where technology is a part of our lives. We are   going to learn how to live with it. I do empathize  with the challenges that comes with technology and   some of the understanding that precedes uh  the safety aspect of all citizens. Uh I as   an black growing up in the south uh could have  had a lot of distrust for the federal government   and well certainly the action you're seeing taken  right now suggests that. But I had to rely on the   federal government to help get through and move  into a life that was productive where I became a   part of American society. And now I'm doing all I  can to ensure I monitor hel accountable those who   we put in office. And I believe the data that  has been presented most certainly represents   something that we can use as a benefit to helping  us have a a safe life within these municipalities.   I come with my research that has been done and  other branches who've looked into this and we   believe it is a tool that can be used productively  and it also can be a tool to enhance what we need   to have to keep all of us safe. So I again support  the recommendation coming from the police chief  

and urge the council to vote accordingly to keep  this system going but watch it closely. Thank you.   Thank you. The next speaker is multicultural  institute and the following group of speakers   after that is Chris Moore, Laura Hill, Melvin  Willis, Robert, Annie Vincent River, a user by the   name of CB, Sarah C, and Marisol. When your name  is called, please be ready to unmute yourself.   User by the name Multicultural Institute, you  can go ahead and start. Please state your full   name for the record. Hello. Good evening. Can you  hear me? Yes. Great. Thank you. Uh, good evening   everyone. My name is Midna Cvantes. I'm a city of  Richmond resident of District 1 and the executive   director of the Multicultural Institute. I'm  speaking tonight on behalf of the Multicultural   Institute and our community partner, the East  Bay Sanctuary Covenant. We are two nonprofits   providing legal and social services to immigrant  families every day. We have been working closely   with the city of Richmond to provide legal and  outreach services to immigrant residents and are   grateful to the city council for the commitments  it has made to stand up for immigrant communities   thus far. However, contracting with flock  safety violates those commitments and damages   the community's trust. Every day we hear from  people who are too afraid to leave their homes   due to fear they will be kidnapped and never see  their families again. I believe in public safety   and I want public safety for my community. But  flock safety is not it. There are other public   safety options for you to consider. And we know  that contract extension with Flock will continue   to put Richmond immigrant residents in grave  danger. Over the past months, Flock has violated   contracts with other sanctuary cities by sharing  their data with federal government for immigration   enforcements and lying about it. Flock's various  pilot programs and backdoor access points make  

it next to impossible for cities and counties  to know how much of the residents data is being   shared. As a result of unlawful data sharing,  over 30 jurisdictions have already terminated,   suspended or rejected contracts with flock in the  past year and mo many more are in conversation.   Why would city of Richmond choose to violate its  sanctuary city ordinance and continue to invest   in infrastructure that will be weaponized  against our communities? I want my family,   friends, and neighbors and myself to feel  safe without fear that our location is being   tracked or shared with federal government  without Richmond's knowledge. Please vote   no on flock. Thank you. The next speaker  is Chris Moore. You can go ahead and start. Hi, I'm Chris Moore with the East Bay Alliance  for Public Safety. You know, there's been a   lot of misinformation circulating about flock  safety cameras, and it's important to correct   the record. For example, some people have claimed  that Oakland is being sued for approving clock   cameras. It's simply not true. Unfortunately,  this kind of misinformation is very typical of   groups like groups like Reimagine Richmond, the  Richmond Progressive Alliance, and certainly the   DSA. They often rely on fear and misleading  claims instead of focusing on the real facts,   which you heard from the chief of police. You also  heard from Brian Hoffer. It's worth noting that   the Oakland City Council recently removed him  from the Oakland Privacy Commission because of   his lawsuits and much of his work involves suing  cities and counties over surveillance policies.   That's how he makes money. So, he comes here  making these same claims and it's important to  

understand the context. He has a track record of  spreading misinformation about block technologies.   The reality is block safety cameras are already  being used across California including Oakland,   Berkeley, Elserto, San Francisco, Alama County,  and Contracasta County. And when Richmond turned   off its flock cameras, autotheft increased by  about 33%. Oakland City Council took notice   and they said, "We don't want more crimes like  Richmond. We want more cameras." Just recently,   the Oakland City Council approved 300 new flock  cameras with a 7 to1 vote. They didn't make that   decision lightly. They studied the technology  and review the privacy protections and rejected   the misinformation. One of the biggest claims is  that Flock shares data with ICE. It's simply not   true. One of the city's own police departments  controls Your time has expired. Thank you. The   next speaker is Laura Hill. You can go ahead and  start. Good evening. My name is Laura and I'm the   vice president of public safety and transportation  policy with the Bay Area Council. We represent   nearly 400 of the region's largest employers  across many sectors including higher education   and research institutions, nonprofit and community  organizations, utility and transportation   providers in addition to our private sector  employers. At the request of our members,   in 2023, our organization built a coalition of 125  employers based in the East Bay who are committed   to building a safer and more vibrant region.  The Bay Area Council and this coalition strongly   supports the Flock safety contract extension and  specifically supports option A, the recommendation   to reinstate the Flock ALPR cameras and continue  the use of the CCTV system and DFR program.   Technology is a vital public safety tool and it is  particularly critical for cities that are facing  

significant law enforcement staffing challenges.  Technology like ALPR, CCTV, and DFR helps officers   increase their response times, identify suspects  faster, connect cases, and provide prosecutors   with stronger evidence. This technology helps  departments to operate more efficiently,   and improve community safety. Additionally,  recent polling shows that the majority of   local res residents do support safety technology,  including visible cameras like ALPRs as tools to   deter crime and make people feel safe. And this  trend holds firm across age, race, ethnicity, and   ideology. Finally, ALPR, CCTV, and DFR technology  has been proven to work and improve public safety   in Richmond, as well as in many neighboring and  surrounding cities in the Bay Area. Enrichment   needs continued access to this technology to  protect residents, businesses, and visitors.   Approving this contract will help the city deter  crime and ultimately strengthen community safety   and economic vitality. Um, thank you for for  your consideration and for your continued   leadership in Richmond. Thank you. Next speaker  is Melvin Willis. You can go ahead and start. Oh, hello Richmond City Council.  Good evening, Melvin Lewis with   ACE and RPA. I'm also here as speaking as  a District 1 resident asking you not to   extend the block contract. Back in 2018 when we  strengthened the city sanctuary city ordinance,   we strengthened it because of the previous  administration that we currently have. And   the condition was was that we're passing  this policy and we are not going to do   business with any vendor license plate  reader that shares information with ICE.

There's a lot of credible reports out there  both locally in the Bay Area and nationwide   that has suggested that block safety program  definitely is information used by ICE based   on just the multiple reports. I mean in Ventura,  Elserto, Mountain View, they discovered without   the local jurisdictions's knowledge or approval  that their license plate data information was   accessed by outside jurisdictions. So if a company  isn't keeping our data secure locally and isn't   informing us that that access is happening,  that's already a violation of breach and trust   in its own. But once again, if a company does do  business or allow their information to be shared   with ICE and Homeland Security, it is in direct  violation of that ordinance we passed in 2018. In   my personal opinion, I do appreciate the chief's  uh cander and presentation and everything that he   went through to bring this presentation together,  but at the end of the day, if they can't keep our   information secure, we can't do business with  them. Please vote no. Thank you. Next speaker is   Robert. Please unmute yourself and say your full  name for the record. You can go ahead and start. Good evening. I'm a Richmond taxpayer and I'm here  to demand what everyone in this city deserves,   and that's public safety for everyone. The flock  cameras work. The numbers are real. 274 arrests,   259 stolen vehicles recovered, 911 criminal  investigations assisted, including homicides,   and when the license plate readers were  paused, vehicle thefts immediately surged   33%. Our number of active sworn officers is  nearly 50% below authorized staffing. These  

cameras are not a luxury. They are a lifeline  for an understaffed department fighting to   protect this community and all of you. on that  deis. And let me be clear, these cameras have   not been used against immigrants. Those are the  facts. Richmond cannot become the next Oakland   watching crime escalate. More and more businesses  closed and jobs disappeared because you failed to   act. Vote yes on option A for at least three years  and keep Richmond safe. Thank you. Thank you. The   next speaker is Annie. Please state your full name  for the record. You can unmute yourself and start. Hello. Uh, my name is Amy Panel and I'm a proud  resident of Richmond. And as a software engineer   who's closely followed the investigative and  deeply technical reporting on Flock for the   last year, I'm here to strongly urge you to  vote against extending the Flock contract.   Flock has a bad record of releasing features  without the settings that best serve their   users and of making gross security oversightes,  including camera systems that were marketed as   encrypted, but in reality were exposed live  streams and administrator control panels that   were available on the open internet due to  incompetent product management. I'm really   grateful that the chief uncovered the two-way  lookup setting and paused use of the system to   reassess it. But I want to highlight that this  situation was a direct result of the company's   poor commitment to transparency to its users and  to the communities that it claims to protect. This   was not a configuration issue. That was how  they built the product. That was how they set   it up. That was intentional and that was their  design. They wanted that to be the default and   they were not transparent about that. They chose  to build it that way in a way that is unwittingly   having departments share their information across  the country when they don't even know they are.   That is unacceptable. That's not just a poorly  built insecure system. It's a clear display of   their values and judgment as a company and they've  shown us that we cannot trust them. Having data  

sharing with other agencies turned off also does  not mean that it is safe just with RPD and Elser   Police Department. Many most of the known cases  of flock data being used inappropriately by ICE   um and other federal agencies were not it  was it was from authorized users within   the system. So all it takes is one RPD or  ECPD officer who disagrees with our state   sanctuary or city ordinance or who's threatened  by someone with power for the data to be made   easily accessible to outside agencies with  no audit fair left behind. And additionally   $290,000 is nothing to a ventureback startup  that is seeking exponential growth. That is   not an assurance that they won't breach the  terms of contract. It is the cost of business   that they can pay. Thank you. Your time has  expired. The next speaker is Vincent. If you   could please unmute yourself and state your full  name for the record. You can go ahead and start. Vincent, if you could unmute yourself.  Okay, we'll come back to Vincent. The next   speaker is River. You can go ahead and start.  Please state your full name for the record. Hi, my name is River Allen and I am a  Richmond resident of district 3. Thank you,   council, mayor, and city administrators for  taking the time to listen to us tonight. Um,   I'm here to speak against renewing any contract  with flock in Richmond. I hope that you deflock   Richmond entirely. I'm all for community safety,  but safety doesn't come from mass surveillance.   It comes from addressing the root causes of  harm. Surveillance actually only leads to more   criminalization of black and brown people. I'm  confused why people spoke up to say that Flock   doesn't do facial recognition or use biometrics  earlier. Um, license plates are directly tied to  

drivers identities. So, it's just not that much of  a difference. Um, and the system doesn't collect   just plate numbers. It collects detailed movement  patterns, basically building a long-term location   history of people's comingings and going. Um,  a gentleman spoke earlier to say, "If you don't   commit a crime, we're not surveilling you. If  you commit a crime, we will surveil you." But   that's simply not how it works, right? The flock  cameras are going to be running all the time,   no matter what. And furthermore, who gets to  decide what a what is a crime or what is legal   is entirely political and it changes all the  time, right? It's a crime to leave Texas to   seek an abortion in a different state. It's a  crime to harbor people who are being searched   for by ICE to to be sent to concentration camps.  It's a crime to live in an RV in San Francisco.   So when it comes to data sharing, it's  important to uplift that according to the ACLU,   even if RPD opts out of data sharing with federal  agencies, flock default system data sharing with   other agencies will occur for investigative  purposes. Thank you. Your time has expired.   The next speaker is CB and then following  that we will try Vincent again followed   by Sarah C and Marisol. DB, you'll have two  minutes to speak. You can go ahead and start. Hello. Go ahead. My name is Christina Retszia.  I live in District 5. Um, thank you council   members and mayor and police chief Simmons  for your time and attention on this issue. I   raised my kids here. I've uh watched Richmond  go through all kinds of changes not long ago.  

My son had his plumbing workban, his livelihood  stolen from in front of our house. It wasn't the   only incident that we've experienced, but it was  uh particularly frustrating. And as we all know,   our I I have had good experiences with our police  force and they're overloaded. They just they have   high priority crimes and simply don't have the  bandwidth to address all the crimes. So, he   was left on his own. He he was able to track the  van down. He lost all his tools. He found it and   anyway, blah blah blah. Um, but the thieves know  too that our our police force is is overloaded and   wouldn't it be great if we could help expand their  capacity if Richmond became a place that criminals   started to avoid instead of coming to plunder. Um,  and I too have grave concerns about surveillance   and privacy. I respect the what the speakers have  raised. I think that these are all issues that are   part of a very complex world that we live in now  and it deserves our ongoing attention. However,   I also feel we have to empower our experts,  especially when they've demonstrated the level   of conscientiousness and leadership that police  chief Simmons has. I urge the council to follow   his recommendations. It shouldn't preclude  exploring other options. It shouldn't preclude   obviously continuing to monitor flock closely, but  at some point we have to trust them to do their   job on our behalfs. Um, no system is perfect. I  think that at this point, given the urgent public   safety needs in Richmond, the potential gains far  outweigh the potential risk. Please choose option   A and trust our police to continue to monitor.  Let's work with them closely to address all the   concerns that speakers have raised and continue  to um adjust through time. So again, thank you   for your time. Please choose option A. Thank you.  Next speaker is Vincent. If you could please state   your full name for the record. You can go ahead  and start. Hi, can you hear me? Yes. My name is   Vincent Einelo. I live in Richmond. Um I just  wanted to it's going to be relatively quick. I  

just wanted to voice my concerns regarding um  flock. I think that everybody in this chamber   um or a lot of people have echoed my opinions.  Um my worry is around increased surveillance.   My worry is also that these systems implementing  more cameras inhibits freedom. It increases um the   innate surveillance, not only just surveillance of  immigrant populations that make Richmond amazing.   Um but it increases all types of surveillance  that make us unsafe. And I don't have to tell   government officials the classic line that those  who give up uh freedom for um protection don't   deserve either. Uh that is what worries me about  surveillance systems in the vicinity. Uh Richmond   has done an incredible job of reducing crime  over the last couple of decades and it has not   been because of the police. Unlike San Francisco  and Oakland, Richmond has not dumped the levels of   funding into the police that those cities have.  Richmond focused on anti-rescetivism through   independent organizations that have reduced  Richmond's um crime rate lower than the national   average. Um, and I think that we need to focus  on other options to help with safety rather than   purely police and punitive measures like flock  cameras. So, I highly suggest that the contract   not be renewed. Thank you. Thank you. Next  speaker, Sarah Ste. You can go ahead and start. Thank you. My name is Sarah Caner. I am a resident  of Richmond District 3 and I am calling to ask you   to um vote to not renew the flock contract. I  am very appreciative of the ways that Richmond  

has limited our data sharing um during the  time that we have had flock. when I started   to see reports about uh flock data being used by  ICE to track down immigrants. I at first thought   that we were immune from that because we only  shared, you know, unlike other jurisdictions,   we only shared our data with one other entity.  And I was really proud of that. and then learning   about how flock can share data without the  consent of the the city that owns the data   was very concerning. Um while I might trust um  Chief Simmons, it is does not the buck doesn't   stop with the police chief here. In addition to  there being an option for any RPD officer to make   an independent decision to turn data over, there's  the opportunity for um the EL anybody in the El   Certo Police Department to turn data over. flock  could share their data. And then most alarmingly,   the system is so hackable that even if we trust  all of the players involved to not share anything,   that data is still not protected and we should  not be collecting it in the first place. Thank   you. Thank you. The next speaker is Marisol. And  the last three speakers will be Linda Whitmore,   Tarnell Abbott, and Ree Sullean.  Marisol, if you could please state   your full name for the record and unmute  yourself, you can go ahead and start.

Hi, can you hear me? Yes. Hi, my name is Maris  Canu. I'm a third generation uh Richmond resident   in D6. I also teach at Contraosta College.  And I want to thank our council members   um for reimagining safety in Richmond. Richmond  has had a powerful history of improving community   safety through community- based strategies and  violence interruption, not mass surveillance.   Expanding autom automated license plate reader  systems like Flock moves us away from that legacy   and toward the track of towards a routine tracking  of everyday residents. Flock cameras don't just   capture vehicles connected to crime. They capture  people, the real Richmond. that information   becomes searchable and sharable across a national  law enforcement network. Once that data leaves   Richmond's direct control, we cannot guarantee how  it is used or by whom. There is also a huge legal   risk to consider. Cities across California have  faced lawsuits over surveillance practices. And   if Richmond adopts or expands or contracts  with systems that lack strict guard rails,   independent oversight, and airtight compliance  with state law, we explo we expose Richmond and   the taxpayers to litigation in courts like  Contraosta County Superior Court. Legal   challenges over data sharing, retention policies,  public records transparency and or improper access   could cost far more than the camera themselves.  Surveillance infrastructure once installed rarely   shrinks. It actually expands and lawsuits once  filed drain our public resources. These resources  

that could be used for housing, youth programs,  violence and inter Thank you. Your time has   expired. The next speaker is Linda Whitmore.  You can go ahead and start. Good evening,   mayor and city council and city manager. My name  is Linda Whitmore. I am a Richmond resident and   I live in the Santa Fe neighbor neighborhood  district 2. Like many people have said, uh,   we in the Santa Fe neighborhood council have  problems with dumping, speeding cars, stolen cars,   uh, people living in SUVs on our streets, uh,  graffiti, and I can go on and name a lot of   other things happening in our neighborhood.  We need the flock cameras to help the police,   code enforcement, and public works. So, you  know, take care of some of these problems we're   having in our neighborhoods. I am a member of the  Santa Fe neighborhood council. We don't sit back   doing nothing. We're out there trying to make a  difference in our neighborhood, but we need help.   Um, our chief of police said the flock cameras  will help. When he thought there was a problem,   they were turned off. He did the research. He  gave you uh statistics showing that the problems   have been solved. um and that he thinks the camera  should be turned back on to make a difference here   in Richmond. I think that the one person voice,  the chief of police is a voice, the expertise that   you should listen to. We hired him for a reason.  And I think that you should listen to him and and   and give him a chance to prove what he's telling  you. You've heard a lot of people talk about the   flock notes and what they think they will do  and won't do. They're not experts. He is and  

he's a voice you should be listening to. So, I am  suggesting and hoping you'll pay attention to our   chief and vote for option A, help keep Richmond  safe. Thank you for your time and for allowing   me to speak. Thank you. The next speaker is  Tarnell Abbott. You can go ahead and start or now Abbott if you could unmute  yourself. You can go ahead and start. We'll come back to turn out. The next speaker  is Ree Sullean. You can go ahead and start. Brian Silman, can you hear me now? Yes. Okay. Sorry about  that. Um, yeah. So, my name is Ree. I also   have family that live and work in in Richmond  and relatives who regularly attend um Richmond   mosques on a daily basis. I'll just say that the  Muslim community is no stranger to the dangers,   abuses, and false promises of surveillance,  especially from the federal government in the   name of public safety. I want to emphasize  that when safety or rather the illusion of   safety for one group comes at the expense of  another, this is not actual public safety.   None of the audits or guard rails proposed can  definitively protect folks from ICE being able to   access this data from the side door or back door,  especially given um what the speaker earlier,   Manny mentioned um that DHS has directed ICE  not to leave any auditable trail for accessing   this data. So, we cannot ignore that both Flock  and ICE have a track record um that should be of   concern to any, you know, city that hopes to be  a safe haven for all of the people who call it  

home. There have been documented cases where law  enforcement officers use um flock databases to   stalk exartners. There are cases where we've seen  ICE get access to this database over the shoulder   of other officers and it we've seen it be used  to criminalize abortion in hostile states. And   so that's why I'd urge you to vote no. Separately,  I want to correct the record on two lies that were   shared earlier from Chris Moore. First, Brian  publicly resigned in protest along with another   commissioner from the Privacy Advisory Commission.  there's an Oakland side article confirming as   much. So to suggest that he was kicked out by  council is absolutely slanderous. And number two,   it's a verifiable fact that Oakland is being  sued over their lack of compliance. Um so I   just wanted to to correct those those two lies.  Thank you so much for your time. Thank you. And   the last speaker will be Tardo Abbott. You  can go ahead and mute yourself and start. Tarnell Abbott, if you  could please unmute yourself like they're having trouble with their audio. So  that Oh, okay. There. That was the last speaker. Y All right. If that was the last speaker, then uh  public comment is closed. I'd like to start out by   uh pointing out that we're actually talking  about two different issues. We're talking about   surveillance and we're talking about flock.  Now, uh the thing we need to focus on here is   flock because we're talking about the contract  with flock. Um so uh the issue before us is also  

about safety and trust especially when it comes  to protecting our most vulnerable communities.   That trust has been broken. That is shame on  flock. If we choose to trust them again and it   happens again then that shame is on us as leaders  of the community. As Maya Angelou famously said,   "When someone shows you who they  are, believe them the first time.   The stakes of these mistakes are too large, too  impactful, and too lifealtering for us to put our   people at risk any further. I have heard a great  deal about the technological capabilities and   features of the company. What I have not heard  is about his compassion. As elected officials,   we must always weigh the human impact alongside  the technological impact of any program we adopt.   Innovation cannot come at the expense of  integrity. Advancement cannot come at the   expense of accountability. We must never seed the  well-being of our residents in pursuit of new and   innovative ways of providing services. Our first  obligation is to protect our community not just   with technology but with judgment, responsibility  and moral clarity. Uh, I also want to point out   that um, Flock inadequately or inaccurately  described what they were capable of doing or   uh, to to us as a city. um I don't think  they can be trusted especially when you   consider their activities in other cities.  Um and and then there's also the issue of of   uh laws, you know, sometimes we have good laws,  sometimes we have bad laws. For instance, um in  

Kansas, uh they passed a new law called the House  Substitute for Senate Bill 244, which immediately erased the ability of people to uh label themselves as transgender or  as uh non-binary. That means that their   birth certificates, their driver's license  were immediately revoked and their driver's   license excer's license were no longer uh valid,  which means that they could use uh drive use the   u point of order ALPR to um to catch them driving  you without a license. Point of order. Yes. We're   less than 5 minutes till the end time. Okay.  Well, uh Mr. Mayor, I would like to make a   motion to continue this meeting to tomorrow and we  can figure out a date and a time to come tomorrow   to finish this because we have five minutes. We're  not going to be able to debate with all of us in   five minutes. So we can my motion is to bring this  item back again tomorrow. We can just continue it   and not end this meeting. We'll just continue  the meeting to tomorrow uh at a time that can   work for everyone. I am suggesting sometime  in the morning and we can finish this off.   We don't have to have public comment because  we already heard from public comment. Let's No, it will be an open meeting. We just don't  need to have public comment because we already   heard public comment. So tomorrow it will  just be to make make your motion. So So we  

That's my motion is to continue the meeting  to tomorrow. Is there a second? Second.   Uh all right. Let's vote. Do we discuss?  I'm getting on a plane tomorrow at 9:00,   so I won't be here. I have a substitute motion.  Let's have a meeting next Tuesday, March 10th,   and continue this item along with the  other items that we don't have time. Why can't we just do this? Sorry.  Discussion or we can just go on now   and just finish it. Let's just do it at the  next meeting. The second motion died. So,   my motion is still on the floor. M clerk,  please take the role. If you're if you're   going to call a special meeting for tomorrow,  you need 24 hours to continue this meeting. So,   we're not going to adjourn this meeting.  We're going to continue till tomorrow. No, this matter can't wait. Council member Brown. Yes.  Council member Bana, what time are we voting on to   continue this this um meeting tomorrow morning?  Tomorrow morning. What time? Tomorrow morning.   What time? Well, we're going to figure out a time  that works for everyone tomorrow. I mean, we have   appointments with council members tomorrow. So,  this meeting will not be adjourned. So, it will be   Parliamentarian rules. So we will not finish this  meeting because we have two more minutes. So what   happens is we don't adjourn. We will continue  it. So it's just we're going to go take a nap and   we all can come back tomorrow again. I can't be  here for that. You can vote against it. But if we   wrote the speech in advance, but if we were to We  took the vote in advance. If we were to continue,   if we were to move this all the way to two  weeks, we're still having no decision for two   weeks whether we are going to be able to use  the cameras or not. There is a young person   running around that needs help and needs  these cameras to be turned on. So does so   we figure that out. Anyways, that's my motion  and that just clarified it. So Miss Christian,   my vote is yes. And what time is the We can  figure out a time over email. Okay. Because  

you know this is nomination period when we have  appointments. Yep. Yep. So we Okay. Council   member Bana. Yes. Council member Jimenez. No.  Council member Wilson. No. Vice Mayor Robinson.   No. Council member Zapeda? Yes. Mayor Martinez?  No. The motion fails with council members Brown,   Bana, and Sepa voting yes. And with the last  60 seconds, I would like to highlight that we   have a young person who's trafficked,  who is phone is pinging in our city,   and this is what we chose to do. So, I just want  that to sit on your good night uh mood tonight. Thanks. Turn off your phones  because your phones are being Well, with that uh this meeting is adjourned.