Community & Economic Development Committee - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon, and welcome to the Community and Economic Development Committee meeting for today, Tuesday, December 9. This the time is now 01:30, and this meeting has come to order. Before taking roll, I will provide instructions on how to submit a speaker's card for items on this agenda. If you are here with us in chambers and you would like to submit a speaker's card, please one out please fill one out to turn into a clerk representative before the item is read into record. Aligner speaker requests were due twenty four hours prior to the meeting starting.

This meeting came to order at 09:30 01:30PM. Excuse me. The speaker cards will no longer be accepted. Ten minutes after meeting has begun, making that time 01:40PM. With that, we will now proceed to take roll.

Council member five? Present. Council member Ramachandran? Present. Thank you. Council member Unger? Here. And chair Brown? Present. We have four members present and before we begin chair Brown do you have any announcements for us this afternoon?

Yes. Thank you so much. Well good afternoon everyone and welcome to our last community and economic development committee meeting of twenty twenty five. It's truly been a pleasure working alongside all of the amazing departments that present to this committee. So housing and community development, economic and workforce development, planning and building, as well as the amazing partnership of our city administration, Betsy Lake and team, as well as the city attorney's office.

And so as a first year council member your partnership and professionalism has really made this first year both productive and impactful. And so as we're looking to 2026 I'm excited for the work that we'll be able to do around anti displacement implementation, the city's economic action plan, as well as continued exploration on how we use Oakland spaces and land for public good. And then lastly I did want to make the announcement that in order to ensure that we complete conclude our meeting on time today we will be limiting public comment to one minute per speaker. And so thank you all so much members of the public for being here and so we can go ahead and get started.

Thank you, chair Brown, for your announcements and noting one minute for all public speakers for every item including open forum. Moving to item one, approval of the draft minutes from the committee meetings held on 10/28/2025 and the special meeting on 11/18/2025. And you do have one speaker for this item. We can hear from the public speakers. To our public speaker.

If you're here with us in chambers, please approach the podium. If you're participating via Zoom, please raise your hands. You're easily identified. Blair Beekman. As I don't see Blair, that concludes your public speakers.

Excellent. And I'll entertain a motion. Council member Unger.

So moved. Second.

We have a motion made by council member Unger, seconded by council member Fife to accept the draft minutes of the committee meetings on 10/28/2025 and a special meeting on 11/18/2025 as is on roll. Council member Fife? Aye. Council member Ramachandran?

Aye.

Thank you. Council member Unger? Aye. And chair Brown? Aye. The motion passes with four ayes to accept the draft minutes of the committee meetings held on October 28 and 11/18/2025. Moving to item two, determination to schedule outstanding committee items, and this is also known as your pending list, you do have one speaker for this item as well.

Okay excellent. And so to the administration any items for our consideration?

Through the chair none at this time.

Excellent thank you so much. And so I'll make the motion to move this item and is there a second?

Second. Excellent

and we can hear from the public speakers.

Thank you, Ms. Asada.

So the upcoming World Cup is supposed to

be an opportunity for us to benefit economically.

But as I said in the finance committee meeting, we as public members were not given correct information related to how we would share with the other cities and county members the responsibility for the $700,000 that was needed to implement the facility needs and hosting the team. At a meeting in July, the Alameda city of Alameda agreed to come up with a $150,000. The responsibility for this project is totally with Oakland roots. We should have gotten some commitment from the city of Berkeley, the county of Alameda, the city of I'm sorry.

Thank you for your comment, miss Asada. We do have a motion made by council member Brown, seconded by council member five to accept determination to schedule outstanding committee items also known as your pending list as is on a roll. Council member five? Aye. Council member Ramachandran? Aye. Council member Unger. Aye. And chair Brown. Aye.

The motion passes with four ayes to accept the termination to schedule outstanding committee items as is. Moving to item three. Adopt a resolution authorizing a city administrator to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the city of San Leandro establishing that the city of San Leandro will process planning a building entitlements for improvements on the existing structure and parking lot at 1 East 14th Street, 10701 International Boulevard, a property property located within their both jurisdictions and act as a lead agency for the purposes of review under the California Environmental Quality Act and you do have one speaker.

Excellent. Thank you so much. And so I believe for this item we can put five minutes the clock and then we'll hear from planning and building.

Thank you. Good afternoon council members. My name is Janna Wismer. I am a consultant for the planning department and I've been working with the city of San Leandro and our city attorney's office to bring this to fruition. Fruition. And could we have the PowerPoint please? As was mentioned, this is a memorandum of understanding between the city of Oakland and the city of San Leandro. The project location is located right on the border of San Leandro and Oakland. This is a map showing the parcelization. And to the lower side of your screen, that is the portion that was within the city of San Leandro.

The three parcels to the north of that border are all within the city of Oakland. And here's an aerial view. The building that is on-site is entirely within the city of San Leandro. All of the area that is within the city of Oakland is just a bare parking lot. There are no structures currently on this on the Oakland site.

As I mentioned, it's comprised of four Alameda County assessors parcels and straddles the border between the cities of San Leandro and Oakland. Again, there are three on the Oakland side, one on the San Leandro side. And the majority of the properties of the parking lot is in within the city of Oakland, 58%. 42% of the property is located in San Leandro. And there's an existing structure on-site a little over 28,000 square feet, again located entirely on the portion within the city of San Leandro.

That building is vacant and I believe former in former years it was used as a towing company. The Greater Grace Temple is wishing to make improvements to the building and the parking lots and other site improvements and that the project will not include the construction of any structures on the existing parking lot. So there will be no structures proposed within the City Of Oakland limits. The project would be required to apply for a conditional use permit through the city of San Leandro. However, if this were going to be the opposite way, if Oakland were to retain jurisdiction over both properties, it would also be a conditional use permit.

And through the conditional use permit process with San Leandro, the city of Oakland would have the opportunity to comment and make suggestions. And, with this memorandum of understanding, San Leandro will be the lead agency for all lands approvals, including building permits, plan check, certificates of occupancy, building inspections, and all the fees to be paid for the city of San Leandro. And emergency services to the site will also be provided to the City Of San Leandro portion and also the area located within Oakland. And with that, we recommend that the city council adopt a resolution authorizing the city administrator to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the city of San Leandro establishing that the city of San Leandro will process planning and building entitlements for improvements to an existing structure and parking lot at one East fourteenth Street and 10701 International Boulevard, a property located within both jurisdictions and act as lead agency for the purpose of a review under the California Environmental Quality Act. That concludes my presentation.

I can answer any questions you may have.

Excellent. Thank you so much. Any questions or comments, colleagues? And then council member Ramachandran, does she have her hand up? Next. Excellent. Thank you so much. We can hear from the if there's any public comment.

Thank you. Miss Lassada?

So with the majority of the property being in Oakland why is San Leandro taking the lead on the property? And with a property like this do the owners of the property pay any assessments to the city of Oakland or do all of it goes does it all go to the city of San Leandro or is it split? How does that work? So do they pay partial taxes or where do you vote with the city of San Leandro or the city of Oakland. And it just leads me to my final comment.

You have the need to have a contract with the city of Piedmont as it relates to the city of Piedmont being able to use Oakland libraries. That has been without a contract for over twenty years and they have had access to our libraries. They give us money, but they give us the amount of money they want to give us every year for that. They don't you have to have a contract and you don't. And I've brought this to your attention several times. It also

Alright thank you so much for your comments. I do think that the report was very clear given that this property is a parking lot, a part of the parking lot. And so colleagues I'll entertain a motion on this. Council member Unger. So moved.

And council member Fife. Second.

We do have a motion made by council member Unger, seconded by council member Fife to approve the recommendations of staff, and this to be forward to the 12/16/2025 city council agenda, and that is on consent. On the roll, council member Fife. Aye. Council member Ramachandran.

Aye.

Council member Unger. Aye. And chair Brown. Aye. This motion passes with four ayes to approve the recommendations of staff and to forward this item to the December 16 city council agenda on moving to item four.

To the chair to the public speaker it is past the time to sign up for public comment.

Yeah. Just emphasize that the time expired.

Okay. Reading in item four. Adopt a resolution, one, authorizing the city administrator to negotiate terms for the exclusive negotiating agreement with Costco Wholesale Corporate and DeCA companies. The develop to develop a Costco Wholesale and Retail General Merchandise Facility in the North Gateway development area of the former Oakland Army Base into declaring the property exempt surplus land. And you do have 19 speakers for this item.

Excellent. Thank you so much. So I believe for item four council member Fife you will be presenting on that and then for my colleagues also available to answer any questions on this item would be Brendan from EWD as well as administrator Johnson. So council member Fife, does eight minutes work for the presentation?

That is fine. Is staff here? Is is Brendan here? Oh, I see him. And if there is not an opportunity, I know we're well, I I just wanna articulate to the public and to mister Kidd who came to speak just on time.

I will definitely make space for you to have those comments that you wanted to share in a public forum when we come back to this this location to have our our greater community meeting. So I want you to understand that your voice will be heard on this topic. That said, I I do wanna share a little bit about this opportunity, so you can start my time, to explore the possibility of developing a Costco warehouse in the city of Oakland. Today's resolution is preliminary step that will allow the city administrator to begin discussions with cost Costco Wholesale Corporation and DECA Companies LLC around terms for an exclusive negotiating agreement to develop a Costco facility in the North Gateway development area of the former Oakland army base. This large parcel has remained undeveloped for far too long which is a loss for the city of Oakland on many fronts.

The city must explore all avenues of opportunity and bringing a warehouse has the potential to generate significant tax revenue, jobs, and easier access to goods for residents. Additionally, the resolution also makes findings that the property is exempt surplus land because a property is subject to a valid legal restriction not imposed by the city which prohibits any residential housing there and there's a feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the prohibition on the site. And I want my colleagues and the community to understand that this item opens the door for discussions, but it is not a binding agreement with any party to any project. An actual ENA, if terms are agreed upon, will have to come back to the full council for a vote and there will be extensive community engagement before a formal agreement is established. So people are asking why Costco?

And I want to give a couple of facts. Costco is the third largest retailer in the world with over 800 warehouses and over 300,000 employees worldwide. Significant new sources of annual tax revenue will be available to the city. There would be hundreds of jobs with competitive competitive wages in West Oakland. There will be localized spending as residents will be more likely to shop in Oakland.

A membership warehouse with a diverse selection of goods and competitive prices is something that hundreds of Oakland residents have asked for, and this opportunity has the potential to fill the gap for affordable groceries and essentials for our impacted communities. Why this particular parcel? This large undeveloped parcel is situated at a location that will have minimal impact to residential communities close to freeways and any mitigation that comes with transportation impacts will be done as a part of this process if approved. Who is DECA? DECA is a real estate investment development firm with a proven track record of major development projects across California as noted in the agenda report.

DECA currently has 15 active projects with a total of a total development value of $10,150,000,000. DECA has approached the d three council office expressing an interest in developing their experience, leveraging their development experience to help bring a Costco to Oakland. And there are several individuals in the exact community in the neighborhood where Costco would come that have expressed concerns about other uses and I want those to be on the table for discussion. As noted in the agenda report, two recyclers were meant to be relocated to the North Gateway parcel within the city entering multiple agreements with the parties as far back as 2012. However, these recyclers have not met the requirements needed to move their operations to the site and currently there is no agreement in place with the two entities.

There's also been a concerted effort led by my office to use this parcel for the purpose addressing our very real crisis of homelessness. Unfortunately, due to legal restrictions around residential use of the site, the resources required to get a waiver from the Department of Toxic Substance Control and the extensive environmental remediation needed, not to mention the funds needed to actually pull something like that together, is neither feasible nor timely. And it is also important to mention that this location has been discussed within the city of Oakland for over twenty years and the issues that were a problem for moving forward twenty years ago have been rectified over time in the city of Oakland. So I want to reiterate that this resolution will only allow for discussion of terms and is not binding. Additionally, I'm committed to ensuring community engagement at every level is central to any formal agreement that comes before the city council should discussion lead to an ENA.

In fact, our first community meeting will be on December 18 and I encourage everyone interested to come. It will be six p. M. Right here in the council chambers, so please join us. We'll have information on my social media for the details and with that understanding we have public comment I'll entertain a motion on this item.

Excellent. Thank you thank you so much council member Fife. I would like to hear from the public speakers first and then we can open up the questions to my colleagues.

Thank you. When I call your name please approach the podium, state your name for the record and as reiterated you do have one one minute. If you're participating via Zoom, please raise your hand so you're easily identified. We will take public speakers in person before Zoom. San Sanford Forte Sanford Forte, excuse me, Kevin Dolly, Stephanie Tran, Petra Brady, Raymond Gallagher, Kathleen Tribe, Philip Tran, Sean Granberry.

Excuse me if I'm mispronouncing your first or your last name. Christina Tostada, Alex Ishuron, Derek Barnes, Rodolfo Bacrisio, Travis Duncan, Tony Bethley, Steven Labonge, Isaac Kesreed Kesroad, Mississaata, David Boatwright, and Prescott chair, and lastly, Derek Barnes. We have you for twice. You can sign up at no particular or you can approach the podium. Thank you.

The ENA will weaken any leverage with two major polluters in West Oakland.

To the chair of the public speaker please state your name for the record.

Okay. Sanford Forte.

Thank you.

The ENA will weaken any leverage with two major polluters in West Oakland who have prior indicated strong interest in the North Gateway location. Claims that those polluters are no longer interested in the North Gateway are unfounded. How do I know? I've asked. Costco will bring tens of thousands of additional car trips through West Oakland every week.

Consider the human cost of increasing microplastic and air pollution caused by Costco traffic. Tens of thousands of trips a week. Microplastics from tires are the major source of urban microplastic pollution. Already, see care for communities spreading the lie that this is an environmentally neutral development. Projected tax revenues and employment from Costco do not take into consideration loss of tax revenue and local jobs when consumers shift their purchase patterns from currently existing West Oakland businesses to Costco. How many local jobs will be lost versus gained? How much tax revenue lost versus gained? I've spoken with Costco's real estate division. East Oakland citizens use the San Leandro location. North Oakland drivers are a mere twelve minutes away.

Thank you for your comment.

Hi council members. My name is Stephanie Tran. As an Oakland resident and small business owner, I am in support of bringing in Costco to Oakland. I want to see our city invest in projects that deliver real value, projects that create long term economic activity, drives revenue, provides stable job opportunities, and serve everyday families and small businesses. As a small business owner, I also rely on Costco for basic supplies.

Having a reliable, affordable, and efficient place to purchase goods in bulk help entrepreneurs like me stay competitive, keep costs stable, and continue serving our customers. Costco also has a track record of contracting with local suppliers. I hope this project will create opportunities for Oakland businesses like myself to become part of the supply chain. So thank you council member Fife for bringing this forward. Let's keep moving this along so that we can negotiate a strong community benefit that will strengthen all of Oakland. Thank you.

Good afternoon council members. I'm Petra Brady. I'm here representing the Oakland African American Chamber of Commerce. I wanted to say thank you council member Fife for presenting this idea to bring Costco to Oakland. I think it's a wonderful thing personally. I think it's a wonderful thing for our businesses. I want to do whatever I can as myself and as an organization to support this because it is another way to improve the narrative around Oakland. We support it wholeheartedly. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Ray Kidd. Thanks to miss Asada for seeding me your time. I live in the Costume McClime's neighborhood of West Oakland, is the same neighborhood that Cast Metals is in. Cast Metals is one of the entities that was going to be moved, should be moved, and hopefully will be moved to the North Gateway. It is a very polluting industry.

It will have, at the North Gateway, it will have very updated, all the current regulations, environmental requirements met. And it will be a much less environmental impact on the community. Currently, it's the pollution that comes out of that, the air pollution, the the particles, the fumes, all of their all of their operations are open or un unsheltered or have no roof on them, they will that this will be remedied. It would to to leave them there now would be a situation of environmental injustice. And if Costco if Costco in in the North Gateway preempts cows from moving there, we will we will be living with that pollution forever.

Hello. I'm Travis Duncan and I have three people who are ceding time to me. Rodolfo Baccarrizo, Tony Biede and Steven Lavongo.

Are they in the chambers? Please identify yourself. Thank you.

Great. Again, thank you. I'm Travis Duncan. I'm here representing DECA, the proposed developer of this potential project. I want to say first off, thank you member to council member Fife for your leadership and your commitment to your constituents. It's very noble. We really appreciate it. And thank you for all of you for taking the time to chat here today. I thought a little bit about us, DECA. We're based in San Francisco. We're a California focused mixed use master plan developer. This is exactly what we do. We search for opportunities that are steeped in complexity and then we work with leaders like you all with the community to try and craft solutions that ultimately result in win win solutions. Council member did a phenomenally good job sort of outlining where we are in the process here. It's early in this stage.

This is an opportunity to have a discussion about a maybe deal. We're really excited about that potentiality and we think this is an amazing location to do something that could be transformational. Opportunities for cheap groceries in a food desert is an opportunity that we're really excited about. And we think that the jobs and the tax revenue associated with that are very interesting and exciting, particularly at this moment in a challenging economic climate. We have other projects that we're working on and it'd be helpful background.

One of them in Southern California, the redevelopment of a Phillips sixty six refinery. We're in active negotiations with Costco on that opportunity. It involves industrial and retail in a similar configuration of what we're talking about here. We have other mixed use master plans in the city of Paris and the city of Bakersfield that are conceptually similar, you know, industrial type districts but retail components and how do we balance those competing priorities in a very similar way to this. This is what we do and we're really excited to do it here.

One of the things that that you hear from people in our industry is time kills all deals. And we really appreciate you all considering this item today to move forward with the discussion and see if we can craft a project that has broad based community support that folks from all parts of Oakland and walks of life can comment on and and and participate in the process. We're really looking forward to the meeting in a couple weeks with the council member. That's just the start of a very long process to maybe get to an agreement and then bring forward a project that we can all support. So I'm here to answer any questions.

If there are any, I would love to answer them. This site has been vacant and unused for a long time and is amazingly well connected to regional transportation in a way that is very hard to replicate. I appreciate the gentleman's comments about additional trips. Trips means people are coming and that's a good thing. Parking lots are full, people are spending money, that's a good thing. This location allows for those people to get in and out of a very heavily trafficked transportation corridor and spend money in Oakland, which is a phenomenal opportunity. I'll just conclude with saying thank you again for taking the time to review this, to talk about it, and to hopefully give us the opportunity to talk formally with the city administrator and staff about this. We think it's transformational and thank you all. I'll be here for questions.

If I called your name, you wish still you still wish to speak, please approach the podium. If you're participating via Zoom, once again, your hands. You're easily identified.

David Boatwright, District 4. Some rhetorical questions here. Who has indicated current interest in this site? If Costco indicated interest in this site in the early 2000s, what happened then? Was San Leandro Costco built after Costco indicated interest in this site previously?

Sean Granbury, Oakland resident. I'm just following up on something we've been working on for us born and raised in Oakland about showing up and stepping up. So, I'm here today. Thank you, Councilman Fife. We know Oakland needs this. I mean, we could argue about, you know, pollution and all this kind of stuff, but we need jobs in Oakland. We need a Costco in Oakland. I was there on some of these negotiations with IKEA and with Costco when it went to San Leandro. So, I'm old enough to have been a part of some of those talks back then. So, I support this 100% and I will rally all my crew to support this 100%.

And, I just want to say thank you. Let's keep moving Oakland in the right direction. Thank you.

Good afternoon. I'm going to be using Isaac Kah's time as well to be added.

Isaac, can you please raise your hand? Thank you.

I'm shorty. Good afternoon. My name is Christina Tostado, but most people know me as Tina from the town. I'm a proud daughter of the city of Oakland, born and raised in East Oakland. I am currently an Oakland library commissioner, a mentor for Life Goes On where we're trying to end senseless gun violence, a board member for Reading Partners for the Oakland Ed Advisory Board. I was a former board member of the Oakland Latino Chamber and volunteer liaison for Mayor Livy Schaff. I pour so much time and energy into this city. Most people actually think I work for the city of Oakland. But I am actually a supervisor for Costco Wholesale. I have been working for Costco for almost twenty years.

I started at the Costco San Leandro in May 2006 as a part time employee while attending Cal State East Bay. The company works for the employees with their school schedules and because they supported my goals, I was able to earn my bachelor's degree in communications and advertising. Costco also, they have strong wages, meaningful benefits, above minimum wage. We have a four zero one ks with company match, Costco stock and twice a year bonuses. Time and a half pay on Sundays, paid sick leave, paid holidays, paid bonding time for new parents.

Comprehensive medical, dental, vision coverage including 150 a year for glasses and contacts. We have access to Smart Dollar, a financial literacy program. Because of the financial literacy my father taught me combined with Costco's strong wages, I was able to purchase my own home in the Bay Area over thirteen years by myself. This is economic stability. This stability changed my life and every family in Oakland deserves that same chance.

I love this city with my whole heart. I love the people in it. Costco every year donates this year. Last year, they donated $3,000,000 to our town babies in North Oakland. I just wanna say that I would love to see Costco and in the greatest city in the world.

Hello, my name is Kathleen Yaribi and I am Oakland resident District 5. I have a background of being a chef for production companies and I have currently transitioned to being a wealth management professional for seven years now. And I want to say that, I'm also a Rotarian and I love being on the Oakland Rotary Club. And what I would like to say is I love Costco's ethics, politics, policies, everything this wonderful woman just said before me went into detail of what I thought I knew but I did not know. I just think this company offers amazing jobs and resources to the community and like I said, I love their politics.

I love shopping there. My sister and other parts of my family live up in Seattle where Costco is like their corner store and I would love to see that happening here in the Bay Area because I love everything Costco provides. Thank you.

Good afternoon committee members, Derek Barnes, d three resident and a property owner. I'm here to support moving forward with the resolution authorizing the negotiation for potential Costco in West Oakland. Let's be clear about what this vote is. This is not an approval for a project. As council member five said, it's a decision to finally explore a viable use for a long neglected site that has sat dormant for two decades, as the council member said, through multiple failed proposals, scandals, and missed opportunities in Oakland.

West Oakland has lived with the consequences of disinvestment, environmental burden for generations, while also being asked to wait patiently. That time is over. It's time to move. The proposal offers a realistic path forward, hundreds of permanent jobs as we heard, construction job site, significant tax revenue for the city that is needed desperately. Saying yes does not lock us in. It is just the beginning. Thank you council member Fife for bringing this to our attention.

Moving to our Zoom speakers. Marcus Johnson, please identify what name you signed under to speak.

PNC chair.

Please identify what name you signed under to speak.

The Prescott chair, PNC chair.

Okay. Thank you. Please begin your one minute comment.

Yes. Costco is great, but I'm not reading any language that suggests Costco has committed any interest in this site. Therefore, in absence of that, and since we're in a discussion only phase, I respectfully request that the resolution for the nonbinding ENA with DECA, COSCO be amended to instead authorize a request for proposals that would allow other real estate investment firms, including DECA, to submit competitive proposals that must be robust and transparent in their process. CWS and Cass Meadows would also be able to reengage. Thank you.

That concludes your public speakers for item four.

Excellent. Well thank you so much for the members of the public that were able to come and speak on this item. And I think that it's been presented very clearly we're really this resolution is you know clearly to begin those conversations. And so I think also at the same time the feedback that we've received as a body both via email and even today from the public speakers kind of voice a couple things. And so I think it is you know to Councilmember Fife you know I just want to uplift a couple of the things that I heard that as we begin these if we are successful in passing this through the committee as we begin to have those discussions you know what will be the impacts to the West Oakland community around the traffic of the trucks kind of coming in and out of West Oakland.

That's kind of a concern so just overall environmental impacts. And then a couple questions that I did have is around I think you answered that the first community engagement on this item will be taking place December 16. I am curious if there will be any other larger discussions outside of just this one that's in December given that it is the holiday season and people may not be available? And then my other question is I am curious if there is a projected timeline for this you know bringing this to fruition.

I just want to point out, I will get to your questions. I was at McClymond's high school last week meeting with a group of young people who were continuing their credits to graduate, it was juniors and seniors and there was a great deal of depression with that group but they came alive when they talked about opportunities for employment and they were even looking for opportunities to do paid internships and they were like if we could just make $16 an hour that would make a difference between kids who are out here robbing and bipping and kids who are trying to do something positive because they don't see any opportunities. And I'm raising that because we don't have enough opportunities in West Oakland for our young people and I see this as a potential and this is just a conversation to start a conversation. There is no elected official in the city of Oakland that has done the type of community work and outreach that I've done. So to even entertain a possibility that I would not have community engagement on this process, I wanna just put that to bed because that is what I do and that is who I am.

This is one of many conversations I'm having with the public that will continue throughout this process. I'm also deeply engaged with environmental justice groups to the point where classified as in in just incorrigible because I'm supporting clean air and water in my district. So that is also something I want to put to rest. That was it's something that I'm working with our real estate department and our city attorney's office to address the polluters that have been in West Oakland for decades. We're going to address that too.

So I I wanna be clear to those who are my juniors in this work that I'm going to continue being Carol Fire district to support what the majority of my district needs, not a vocal minority. That said, the timeline will depend on the city administrator's office and and city administrator Johnson, I welcome you to weigh in with your perspective because you've been integral to moving this forward and supporting my office with this work and conversations with DECA. But it will depend on the city administrator's office and how discussions pan out from there. But I will continue to include my residents, my constituents in this process as we move forward.

Through the chair, council member Pfeiffer, thank you so much for your comments and feedback. And our staff, me personally, and the team, we are very supportive of your legislation and the Costco item that's being brought forward, significant tax benefits to the city as well as high quality jobs. And quite candidly, I know one of the things that we consistently talk about is the need to be aggressive when it comes to economic development. And if we have opportunities that present themselves, well, we're gonna take advantage of it and we're gonna push hard in in ways that we haven't in the past. And so I I certainly wanna welcome the opportunity for our staff to come up if there are any technicals questions that that may come up.

I know one of them is sort of a timeline. I think it's probably mid q one, '1. But if mister Moriarty is is here, he can certainly, you know, color give me a little bit more context with some more specificity. But I really appreciate the fact that we're here and we're having the public discussion and debate and also the community engagement aspects of what's being presented. And, again, to have a conversation is where we are and we look at competitive communities around us that we aspire to.

Well, quite frankly, this is what they do And, we have to move forward as an organization because like you, we get the same calls about employment opportunities and and the fact that many of our residents are spending their their money and other communities are taking advantage of the tax dollars that could be coming into Oakland. So, I appreciate the opportunity for us to do the work, present all the facts so that you all can collectively make an informed decision. And so, I'll defer to Mr. Moriarty who can certainly provide a little bit more context with respect to the question that you asked. Thank you.

To the chair, Brendan Moriarty, director of real estate. And just on the question of timing, can't make total total commitments because there's two parties involved obviously. But that we're not negotiating the deal as a result of this were to pass. We would simply be negotiating the elements of an exclusive negotiation agreement which then that's really the time to negotiate the deal. So there's not that much is my point that needs to be negotiated as a result of the resolution. I don't imagine it will take that much time. You know, I think what the city administrator said about q one is probably the right time frame to have in mind.

Excellent. Thank you so much. Colleagues, council member Unger.

So I I support this idea of bringing a Costco to West Oakland. I think it's the kind of jobs and retail that we need and and I appreciate council member Fife for her hard work and trying to make something good happen at that spot that has been fallow for so long. My only question is if somebody could make the case for me about why we should be exclusively with DECA at this point rather than doing an RFP for somebody else to perform this work. And I don't know if that's for for council member Fife or for mister Moriarty or

Yeah. Through the okay.

Go ahead.

Through the chair I can take one stab at that and in addition others if they want to. I I think you know the OMC does generally require a competitive process for the disposition of property for development. However, know it's also I think mindful of the fact that the market is what it is and you have to seize opportunities at times. So there's a process described in the OMC for waiving the competitive process if it's in the best interests of the city. That does require analysis and a finding by the city administrator.

And so as part of the process, you know, responding to this resolution and coming back with terms for an ENA, we would do that analysis and be able to provide that at that time for city council to consider. Is it in the best interest of the city? What are the considerations you would want to have in mind at that point in time?

So you're still undergoing the process of figuring out the elements of why we don't need an RFP?

That's right. If this passes, we would then do that analysis to give you the information so you could see as the decision making body, is it in the best interest of the city to accept these, to proceed with the ENA as now presented or actually are the other considerations, should we pump the brakes, should we do something else? At this point in time we don't have that analysis done but we do it as a result of this.

I see. So you could come back with a desire to broaden the field.

Yeah, I think if we were to do that analysis and find that oh actually this is maybe not in the best interest or some compelling things that need to be considered, would raise those considerations for you.

Okay, that makes sense to me. Thank you.

Excellent. Thank you so much Councilmember Unger for the question. Council member Ramachandran, any questions?

Not at the moment.

Okay. Excellent. And council member Fife, did you wanna make the motion on this?

I made the motion earlier but I do want to just comment briefly on the retail and estimated economic loss that the city of Oakland experiences from retail dollars going to other cities. There was a consultant that the city hired in 2008 to do a study and I I will bring more of this information to the public once we go through this process. But Conley estimated that Oaklanders should be spending $1,500,000,000 in the city of Oakland. $1,500,000,000, and this was in 2008. And a lot of that retail leakage was going to cities like Emeryville, and Berkeley and San Leandro.

And with all of the legislation that's moving forward next year from a ballot initiative to several other things that have recently passed through CED, if we are going to be aggressive about holding those dollars in the city of Oakland, I think this is a first step towards that process. And in terms of the the issues that are faced by West Oakland residents and what we need, this is something that is desperately needed, has been has been to me communicated to me by by several individuals. And we will do our due diligence as the city of Oakland comparing the different proposals that have come forward. But I wanna state for the public, no other organization, no other company, no one has reached out to me outside of DECA for Costco. There have been no phone calls, no complaints until recently people talking about truck traffic or car traffic which will be mitigated in any analysis that the city does.

So I wanted to state that for the record and reiterate that I personally believe that this is in the best interest of my district and in the best interest of the city of Oakland have a Costco warehouse inside of our city limits. And I will reiterate my motion to move this item forward.

Excellent. Thank you so much council member Fife. Council member Unger.

I'll second it.

We have a motion made by council member five, seconded by council member Unger to approve the recommendations of staff and afford this item to the December 16 city council agenda, and that is on consent.

Well I am suggesting that it be on consent but that is up to the body. Yes, this one.

On roll, council member five. Aye. Council member Ramachandran? Aye. Council member Anger? Aye. And chair Brown? Aye. This motion passes with four ayes to approve the recommendations of staff and afford this item to the December 16 city council agenda on consent. Moving to item five. Receive an informational report on the city of Oakland's cannabis equity program. And you do have two speakers for this item.

Okay excellent. Okay thank you so much. And so on this next item we will hear from Kat Torrio and then also online to answer any questions is also Darlene Flynn from the Department of Race and Equity. Excellent. And will eight minutes be good?

Yeah, it might be less than that.

Okay, excellent.

Thank so much. So hello, thank you so much for taking the time. I'm Kat Torio, I'm managing the special activity permitting division which houses our cannabis program. This is a report, an informational report on the city's cannabis equity program which was asked that we would bring this forward to before we start spending any of GOPA six. So I do have a short presentation that we'll just work through.

Can move it forward to the next one. Thank you. So on March 18, city council accepted the 2,074,369 of the GOBIS grant funding from the state to support the city's cannabis equity program. As part of that, there was a provision added to the resolution that requested that we come with, should return to city council with an informational report on the status of the equity program. This report serves to honor that request.

A little history. We'll go to the next slide. The equity program has to be we started, the city of Brooklyn established it, and this is the nation's first cannabis equity program in the 2017. Our pioneering efforts and equity analysis that was done by the Department of Race and Equity here at Oakland created the cannabis equity program. It also inspired jurisdictions across the country to pursue and support similar programs.

In 2019, the state of California set aside annual grant funding to support local jurisdictions cannabis equity programs And as of December 2025, we have 211 equity cannabis businesses in Oakland. Next slide. Just a little bit of history for what we've been awarded. Thank you, darling. Since 2019 we have come in first and second.

There is a matching requirement for these funds. So coming in third in the 2526 year which is the just over 2,000,000 that we were awarded for GOBIS six. And that is due mostly because we have matching requirements. Those matching requirements were put into place starting with that grant. So we are really hoping that we can get this money out the door quickly and we can move to the next slide.

We do an annual survey for our equity program. We got 52 responses in 2024 and just wanted to go through some of the points that we asked on that survey. So there's 41 currently operating businesses, 11 are pending working through the permitting process. 34 identify lack of capital as a barrier for operating and we know this, we know it's very difficult to do business in general. It's even more of a disadvantage to do cannabis business as there are many barriers, banking and a few other things and it's federal, not able to write off taxes.

So we're asking operators to act as regular businesses and they are truly at a disadvantage. There are 45 prior recipients to either a grant or a loan from the city. So we are actively getting this money out into people's hands. 32 stated that funding made it possible for the business to continue operating. These grants cover a lot of expenses and we'll go over that a little bit later in some of the slides.

But first I wanted to just talk about who the program serves. Next slide. One of the program, one of the application survey questions for applicants is, has any owner, partner, board member, or your business or any immediate family members, parents, siblings, spouse, child been convicted or incarcerated for any cannabis related charges? This is one of the key elements of the equity program. We wanted to target and make sure that people who had been put through the system before because of cannabis violations of some sort that they had an opportunity to have a business.

And so you can see here it's twenty five point forty eight percent. Yes. They have experienced this in their time and now are able to have participate in the legal market. Next slide. As far as the demographics we do ask that.

Of course it's optional but you can see most of 38 of our applicants on the again, 51 that responded are African American, nine Hispanic Latino, nine white, eight Asian, and declined to state six, and so on and so on. Native American three, Hawaiian one, and others not listed. So we we have diversity as Oakland is very diverse and we're very happy that we are targeting and getting new people in every year. We're hoping to continue to grow this program. I just wanna shout out, I'm not sure if everybody's gonna be able to speak, but we do have two operators that have been very successful stories here.

We have Josh Chase from O'Connor here and we also have Ricky McCullen from Ruton and the five ten here. And they are equity operators doing their work here in Oakland and have great businesses and very much are very proud of the work that they've been able to do here and the people they've kept employed in the businesses that they have. So I just wanted to make that point. Next slide. We are expanding some of the uses of the grant funding.

We've listened. We recognize that cannabis is a difficult business in general. It needs every year to be kind of looked at to see what is changing in the industry and how we can meet those needs. So we have listened and we have set aside some money for startup grants to encourage some new applicants to come to the table. We're giving out 15,000 for new equity businesses and this would go to applicants who haven't received any grants in the past.

So truly we want, you know, some grassroots new businesses to come to the table and we hope this will help them. We also have grants to support conversions or creation of cannabis cafes. We so far do not have one. There is models that we can copy that are in San Francisco. We're hoping that we can encourage with some of this funding to have dispensaries that have on-site consumption lounges if they can convert into a cannabis cafe which allows food and entertainment.

We think that will really help our industry and kind of help lessen the stigma that cannabis has. We also have grants to support cannabis special events. We've heard from a lot of operators that they just don't have enough opportunities to sell to the public to be public facing. And so we're hoping that these special events that will of course be in conjunction with the state as far as following their rules and their regulations for that and the local jurisdictions that we can have more events happening in different locations throughout the city and encourage those types of sales. The rest of the items that are listed on here are items that historically we have supported with grant funding and we will continue with GOVIS six.

The last slide we have supporting equity ownership. We have also heard that it's difficult in for folks to stay in business. A lot of times they take on partners. Of course, the city can't monitor always what those agreements are with partners, but we do have technical assistance and we also have legal assistance that are eligible expenses for grantees. So what we have changed and what we can offer to kind of help with this is that if application is a 100% equity owned, a 100% of the city permit fees will be waived.

That's something we've had ongoing, we'll continue to do. That serves for our matching portion which we're able to submit to GOBIS and and get those matching funds as far as how much we can get for the grant. Applicants, what we're moving to forward to do is to require annually that applicants must provide a copy of the business agreement reflecting the current percentage structure of the partnership. So we wanna see that on an annual basis, make sure that it's not changing and that we haven't been notified. Applicants will maintain correspondence with City of Oakland through the equity applicant.

Is really important. We wanna make sure that we're having conversations with the equity applicant on a regular basis, that they are actively involved in the business, and that there's plenty of opportunity for them to tell us any changes to the business and report any any things like that. So if there are reported changes in the business we ask that that our department is notified within thirty days. We do have a transfer process for any equity business to sell to a general or any transfer of any business in in general. They do have to go through that entire process through our department before it's finalized and we also notified the state of that. So that is all I have for this presentation. Happy to take any questions.

Excellent. Thank you so much. We can go to the public speakers first and then I have a couple questions.

Thank you. I want to call your name please approach the podium. Miss Asada and Ricky McCullough. And please state your name for the record.

Absolutely, Ricky McCullough. Ricky McCullough. How are you guys doing today? I'm here to speak on behalf of the Equity Grant Program. I'm one of the first equity lottery recipients of 2018. And, my experience with the process has been very undaunting. They made it very easy for all equity applicants to be able to receive these funds. Very easy process. I'll explain my process here really quickly. They sent out emails notifying all applicants that there's funding available coming from the state.

After that, there's some subsequent emails come out sending out surveys to all equity applicants to get feedback. Once the data is received, then they will then send out another email notifying what funding is available along with the application process. During the application process, there's a grant schedule that notifies our obligations as an applicant to be able to sorry, can I get

You can continue?

Okay, thank you. Notifying our obligations and responsibilities for that grant. Application is really easy as I mentioned before. It's meant for an applicant like myself or owner operator to be able to process this application without any professional counsel. We have a wonderful department here that also supports us.

All equity applicants, Nancy really does a great job with helping us with this, getting through this process. Once there's multi tiered process as well for the grants, so you don't have to be fully operational to be able to access these funds, which is a really great thing. It's multi tiered that coincides with multi tiered funding. So it allows for multi entry points. Once you've completed the process, the city will notify you if there's any things that you need to submit. But it's pretty easy. Submit your documents and they'll notify you, you get your check and you're

Thank you so much for your comment. Unfortunately we have a lengthy agenda so I gave you an extra minute. Thank you.

I remember very vividly when this process started the room was full with opportunity anticipation and something says oh I got a chance now. And then little by little as the process was being reviewed people were coming in and saying it's not working for them. It's not working. The struggles, the competitiveness of the bigger cannabis groups, they were being pushed out and they needed help and they weren't getting it. So I don't know how this is considered successful when I need to see the evidence and the data that says how many people started and were able to maintain over a substantial period of time being in business.

And I don't think it's that many. And I've seen people come here and say, we really want this and I'm That

concludes your public comment for five.

Excellent. Thank you so much. So thank you so much for the presentation and the information report. I know that when this item came before us earlier in the year. Oh is there still another public comment?

Did did were you able to sign up to speak? Alright that that's that's fine.

And to the to the public speaker please state your name for the record.

Joshua Chase. So my name is Joshua Chase. I went to Ocampoa School District my whole entire life. I've been in the city for most of my life. And I just wanna say, just for the record, that this grant program has been great for most operators in the city. I would not be where I am today without the city of Oakland, without Nancy Marcus, and without this grant program. Life is full of optimistic and pessimistic. You can see opportunities of half being full or half being empty. Anything given to an entrepreneur that is not earned by himself particularly or herself particularly is a positive. And without this program, I wouldn't be where I am. I'm an operator, owner. I own a 100% of my business. I do not have partners. I do not have anything like that. I'm able to do that.

I employ 20 local people, people that are one third of our staff is LGBTQ. Half of them speak Spanish. And we are Oakland operators. I just want to say the city of Oakland has the best program in the nation.

Thank you so much for your comment. Very nice feedback. And so kind of as I was mentioning I know that this item is before us today because you all came in I believe presented the grant to us earlier in the year I think some of my colleagues have requested that we do a report back. So some of the specific questions that I had I think maybe one of the maybe the easiest one here is do you know offhand how much of the grant funding will be going to support the cannabis cafes?

Well it's tied in with operator grants. So anybody there's only a few that actually have to have a cannabis cafe you have to have an on-site consumption so you have to be dispensary. So I think we have four total that are equity owned. So if any of those transition, we would move them we would move funding to support that. But it's really up to them.

So if there's a new dispensary that wants to open up, I don't think we have that process open right now, but we are talking about looking into how we can open up to have more dispensaries and seeing if that's a possibility. We have to work at planning and building and figure out zoning if if that's, you know, even feasible and how quickly that could be. So there isn't a specific amount but any eligible dispensary that wanted to turn into that was equity would be eligible for these funds.

Okay, excellent. I see. Thank you. And so on page eight of the report it outlines just some of the goals of staff around implementing to you know help prevent some of the predatory partnerships that were occurring. Do you know offhand which one you know staff is you know I guess focused on implementing right away?

Both. We only have two technicians that are focused on cannabis and both of them will be involved in that process. Of course Nancy Marcus leads that section of the division. Every situation is different, every owner agreement operator agreement is different. So we're really have to get into the weeds and kind of case manage a little bit on this which we're willing to do but it does take time.

So right now the state has changed some of their rules. They are eliminating provisional licenses. So anybody who hasn't transitioned to an annual license, their provisional will go away. So they will really have to work with local jurisdiction to get they have to get to their annual license in order to stay within our permitting division. So we might have less folks, the folks who are deciding to leave the table. They're not going to continue to pursue trying to open up. And so we're hoping that as we we see how these changes at the state affect how many applicants we are dealing with on a daily basis, we're hoping we can do more case management for the ones that are staying on. Excellent.

Thank you. And then maybe last question would be, are you all collecting geographic data as to understand where in Oakland applicants live so that we're ensuring that we're actually reaching some of these priority like neighborhoods and communities?

Yeah. Darlene, I don't know. Did you wanna talk about the the zip codes and any of that portion of it? Do you want me to? Sure. Darlene's group really put together how they they worked on the the different zip codes and what qualifies as eligible for equity and I think that we are tracking those and we definitely have an idea.

So from the beginning, eligibility to participate in the equity programming required geographic connection to Oakland and and proof. And and this was one of the barriers in the beginning as well for some people who couldn't necessarily document their history of residency and that, you know, people move around, they come in. We we made it as broad as we could so that people could get in. It was like ten years out of the last 20 or something like that, but we required documentation. And Nancy, as far as I know, we're still doing that. It's still the same guidelines to qualify for these supports. And so yes, we do have those records because it's part of the application process.

And so I guess, you know maybe when we come and present in the future maybe we can have a graph that outlines where we're hitting in some of those zip codes just to

Where people came from? Yeah. Not necessarily where they are now but where they came from. Sure. I think that's probably possible if you'd like to have that kind of data displayed. It could be done because it is part of the process.

And and that's just mostly, you know, really being interested in, you know, how this program how we're reaching, you know, some of these key zip codes across the city and if we're you know, how we're doing with that.

Yeah. Can I just add one thing about the program itself and how it's developed? What you see now is a program that is built out at an extensively higher level than it was originally. When we began this program, we had $0. And we knew that capital was critical. It's critical to any new small business. And so a lot of creativity went into how to create opportunity for marginalized entrepreneurs to get into the business before it got absorbed by more dominant groups. Right? And it was a very creative approach. You can read about it.

It was very cool. It was temporary, and eventually we were able to phase it out because we knew that as cannabis revenue came in that we would be able to fund some of the kinds of programming that we have now through cannabis revenue, through new revenue basically. And fortunately the state of California followed our suit and started their own program where they pushed revenue down from the state and they're still doing it as you saw in the report. We were already established as an equity program, so we got the bulk of those first grants because we were the only city at that time set up to get them. Now we compete for them with other cities, but I just wanted to highlight what an incredible leading edge thing this was for Oakland to do, for the council at the time to do, and it was the first project I got to work on when I got here nine years ago.

So I'm particularly proud of it that it's still going and that it has had the impact it's had. That being said, starting a small business is no small thing. 50% of all small businesses fail. And so, the idea that we would have had the audacity to say, we're going to make a pathway for people who are least likely to succeed because they don't have the community resources. And basically, you can't go to the bank to get a loan for a cannabis business for obvious reasons. So if you don't have community resources to draw on to start a dispensary or a cannabis business, then you're kind of out of the market and out of the competition. So we didn't eliminate all competition. There's plenty of competition out there. It's not all equity businesses, but we know that we created a meaningful on ramp and the program continues to improve. So it has changed greatly over the years.

It's been expanded. We do listen to the feedback from the businesses whether they succeed or not. We take that in and have been able to fill more and more gaps as time has gone on. I don't expect that that will stop. Excellent.

Thank Well, thank you both for your leadership on this item and then I also and and Nancy and then I also believe that one of the trailblazers in this space was Greg Minor.

I could not have done it without Greg Minor. I was brand new here. Greg Minor had been working here for quite some time. He'd been working in the cannabis space and when it was medical cannabis, before it was recreational, and we formed a great partnership. He had the you know, that that sort of cannabis awareness. And then we were able to put the equity analysis on it, which untangled some problems that the legislation had run into. We were able to fix it and get it passed and get it rolling with no dollars in the beginning. So, yeah, thank you for bringing up Greg's name. He's, you know, he's gone on to another city. But but without him, I don't know. But between he and Nancy, I don't think this would have happened.

Excellent. Thank you. Council member Fife?

I just have a couple questions and thank you director Flynn for bringing up the origin of this program and thanks Kat for just all your work. I know you're you really want this to be a successful program and I think pointing out some of the challenges doesn't mean we don't understand how this program is moving forward, but there are still some things that we need to address. And I can't talk about cannabis equity without talking about the pioneer in Oakland's cannabis equity and that's council member Desley Brooks for creating this program in the first place, so shout out to her. But I I want to understand the staffing needs for the department to effectively manage this program and I want to understand what interdepartmental coordination looks like to support cannabis equity in Oakland.

Yeah. Okay, well one thing that we're doing that's gonna help a lot especially with record keeping and being able to spit out really clean reports quickly is Acela, moving this on to Acela. This has been a huge lift because cannabis is so complicated and it's got fingers in every single department. So we've been working with the seller for almost two years straight to get this up and we are in the last phases of testing it before it can completely we can migrate all the applicants over to it. And again with the the changes in the state law, seeing who's really on board and who's really moving forward and then we can look and see if we can grow and and open a backup for dispensaries and other businesses to have opportunities in cannabis.

So that's one thing. We're hoping that that's really gonna be in full effect by spring migrating folks over. And in the fall, we're hoping that we've vetted and tested all the the hands that go into the other departments as far as fire and planning and building and making sure that those systems all correctly work. The other thing we're doing is we've proposed that we want to get a program analyst for the cannabis for strictly for the cannabis program to really help us with the grants. At one point, we had three grants running at the same time and poor Nancy was doing it all and it's a nightmare if you're trying to keep track of that many things, that many reports.

Each grant has its own eligibility and criteria and things that the budget allows. So we really need one person, one staff member focused on that. It's also a lot of case management. You don't just, know, it's not just a couple emails. You're talking with applicants constantly getting other information, letting them know that this what you submitted isn't correct. I need this instead. There is a lot of interaction. A lot of the equity applicants don't aren't necessarily so business savvy. They're they haven't had businesses before. This might be their first venture.

So there is a lot of hand holding as far as like what documents are required and and what types of insurance are required, what levels of insurance. So those types of things we're hoping if we have one person focused on this then it will make it much easier to track, much easier to get the reporting done effectively and it will allow us to look and ask for more money. So those are some of the changes that we're looking to implement in this next year. Thank you.

My last question is earlier I believe it was earlier this year, I worked with council member Kaplan to bring forward on-site consumption permits and you you said that there were four I believe in your presentation you said that there were four

equity ones. I believe there's only four that are equity. There's other consumption dispensaries that are non equity that are general but yeah four that are equity.

That was my question. Were they equity or just overall? So there are four that have applied for this particular license and are

They haven't applied. They they just they are dispensaries with on-site consumption so they are eligible to become a cannabis cafe if they choose to.

Understood. Thank you. Mhmm.

Excellent. Thank you so much. Council member Ramachandran, any questions on this item?

No. I'm just really glad to see the program's success continue and knowing that we are one of the strongest in the state and continue to get funding for this. You know? Just, excited to see it grow and for other cities to take our lead on something like this.

Excellent thank you so much and so for this item I believe that we just so thank you so much. I believe that we would just I'll make the motion to receive and file this in committee.

Is that right?

Unless staff wants this item forwarded to the council meeting.

I'm sorry.

So we can either just receive and file this report or does staff want this item forwarded to the city council?

Just receive and file is fine.

Excellent. Thank you so much.

And now

do we have a second on that motion?

I'll second that. Thank you.

Thank you. We have a motion made by council member chair Brown, seconded by council member Unger to receive and file this in the CED, Community Economic Development Committee. On roll, council member Brown council member five? Aye. Council member Ramachandran? Aye. Council member Unger?

Aye. And

chair Brown? Aye. The motion passes with four ayes to receive and file this in the c e d committee. Moving to item six.

This

item requires an urgency vote as this item was placed on a three day agenda. I would just need a motion.

And

at the presence of council member Wong.

Give me one second. So I believe for this item we would hear, we can hear from council member Wong but then also on hand is the sustainability

team

right?

Yes. Excellent.

This item also requires an urgency vote.

Okay. Excellent. So we just need a motion?

At the presence of council member Wong we just need we would need to convene.

Yeah. The urgency finding on this one was made in rules but we need to adjourn into a special meeting. Council member Unger.

So move that we adjourn into a special meeting please.

Second. Thank you. We have a motion made by council member Unger, seconded by chair Brown to adjourn the community economic development committee meeting and to convene into a special meeting of the full council at 02:50PM on roll. Council member council member Fife? Aye. Thank you. Council member Ramachandran?

Aye.

Council member Anger? Aye. And chair Brown? Aye. This motion passes with four ayes. We are now are now into a special meeting of the full council and I will also need a motion for the urgency finding.

It's my understanding that the urgency finding was made at rules.

And it's can I make comment around the urgency?

One second. I'll go ahead and make that motion. Second. Thank you.

Thank you. We have a motion made by chair Brown, seconded by council member Fife to approve the urgency finding. On roll, council member Fife? Aye. Council member Ramachandran? Aye. Council member Unger? Aye. And chair Brown. Aye. The motion passes with four ayes. I will now proceed to read the item into record. Adopt a resolution in support of the Bay Area air district timely implementation of rules nine four and nine dash six to establish a zero emission building appliance standards with the appropriate flexibility to ensure equity equity and business development. And you do have three speakers for this item.

Excellent. Thank you so much. And so now we'll hear from council member Wong and I guess the team at in sustainability as well if if needed.

Sounds good. Yes. Nick is Cordish is here to answer any questions as the subject matter expert. But today I am bringing forward a resolution in support of the Bay Area Air District's timely implementation of rules nine four and nine six. The rules that establish zero emission building appliance standards with the appropriate flexibility to ensure equity and protect our residents and small businesses.

So let me begin why this matters. Across the Bay Area, gas burning appliances, the water heaters and furnaces inside our homes and apartments are a major source of harmful air pollution. They emit nitrogen oxides, fine particulates, carbon monoxide, even benzene. These pollutants contribute to asthma, cardiovascular disease and they shorten lives. Every year in our region, this pollution causes an estimated eighty five premature deaths and fifteen thousand asthma attacks and nearly $890,000,000 in related health care costs.

And we know who bears the brunt of this harm. It's black, immigrant, and low income communities who already face disproportionate pollution sources. It's the appliances burning inside these buildings that threaten our commitments to public health and environmental justice. And we know that climate change is not abstract. Burning fossil fuels in homes accounts for roughly 11% of our statewide climate emissions.

Heat pumps which are clean, safe and farmer efficient reduce lifetime emissions by up to 93% compared to gas systems. And this is also about basic public safety and fire risk. Gas lines are prone to rupture during earthquakes. I don't know if you've all noticed, we've had a couple of earthquakes in the last couple of months. Fires often follow earthquakes when gas infrastructure breaks, and we need to be preparing for the worst.

So that's why in 2023, the Bay Area Air District adopted groundbreaking standards to gradually phase out the sale of gas water heaters starting in 2027 under rule nine six and gas furnaces starting in 2029 under rule nine four. These standards only apply when appliances already broken or being replaced. No one is being forced to remove working equipment. This timeline is deliberate. It gives our residents time to plan.

It gives the trades and industry time to train workers, expand supply chains and build capacity. Immediately after adoption, the Air District in recognition of the practical challenges associated with this transition began working on 2026 flexibility amendments to ensure that these rules account for individuals like low income homeowners, including convening an implementation working group that includes cities, environmental justice working groups, environmental justice groups, and economic justice partners to ensure that this transition is fair and practical and takes into account exemptions for low income homeowners, small businesses, and homes that would major upgrades to accommodate the transition. So tomorrow, and this is why this was urgent, the Air District is achieving a major milestone in this rule making process with the December 10 hearing regarding these so called flexibility amendments. The rule making while slated to continue, we have the fossil fuel industry and its allies exerting enormous pressure on this regulatory process to go back on its 2023 decision. And so it's important for Oakland to join cities Francisco and Berkeley to make clearer stance at this critical milestone early in the rule making process before it reverses.

Passing this resolution ensures that Oakland makes clear that we support timely implementation and not only the original standards adopted in 2023, but we support the process to adopt amendments that ensure that this transition avoids undue burden on low income homeowners and renters, small businesses and building professionals, and in includes flexibilities that really prevents unintended harm while also advancing clean air, climate, and safety goals. This is exactly why with our Equitable Climate Action Plan, the ECAP adopted unanimously in 2020 which sets a target for all existing buildings to be efficient and all electric by 2040. Rules nine four and nine six are the policy tools that make that possible. We provide the market certainty that contractors, manufacturers, and workforce partners need to prepare for this transition. And as for Oakland residents, this is an opportunity.

Heat pumps save energy, they lower utility bills over time and when paired with solar and weatherization, they make homes safer, healthier and more comfortable especially during extreme heat, wildlife smoke events and also as I mentioned earthquakes. So today we are not simply endorsing a regional policy, we are advocating for Oakland's public health, climate safety, and economic future. So with that, let's show that Oakland stands with science, clean air, equity, and with our regional partners I respectfully ask for your support.

Excellent. Thank you so much council member Wong and for your leadership on this item and so I'm definitely in support. I just had one I guess technical question. Do I know you mentioned that there's the meeting on December 10 but do you have more insights into the Bay Area Air District's timeline for implementation? I believe that maybe the meeting on the tenth is more as a like maybe an informational and there will be a series of meetings before actual implementation.

Yeah. It's major milestone. It's kicking off this process. There is the risk as I said given some of the pushback that and which is why we should weigh in now that rule making could be reversed, things like that. And so we want to make sure that doesn't happen. Nick, do you want to comment on more on the timeline that's ahead of us?

Sure. Nick Cordesch from the Sustainability and Resilience Division of the City Administrator's Office. The timeline we're looking at starts in 2023 when the district first passed this legislation and then they're looking at the first bit of implementation in January 2027. So between now and then, it's a rulemaking process where we as staff will provide letters, comments to that committee.

Excellent. Thank you so much. Council member Fife.

I just wanna say through the chair to council member Wong, I really appreciate your thorough laying out of the information here and appreciate your expertise with your background in the EPA and all your other environmental work. I'd be happy to support and champion this. I know it was discussed in rules about the urgency and how it was moving forward with the Air District and I wanted to know if through you if there will be any other requirements from the council other than a vote in order for you well, I wanna know how you plan on representing the city on this item if at all when it comes forward there and I'd be happy to make a motion to accept. Just wanted a couple answers to those questions.

Yeah. No. I that's a great question. So assuming that we pass this today and then goes before the council, I think with that I noticed there's a number of cities who've submitted comments and that we could use that to then submit a letter of support where the rule making is collecting comments from the city. So you'll notice a number of letters of support submitted by, I think it was the city of San Francisco, Berkeley, and probably some others that I'm missing.

I

made the motion so we can go ahead. Thank you. Thank you for your responses.

Excellent. And I'll second it. And council member Unger or Ramachandran, any questions?

Just a quick comment. Thank you for bringing this forward. I did already send a letter of support on this item from my District 4 office and happy to move this and signed a petition as well and happy to move to that it's it is moving forward.

Thank you, counsel.

Notice your letter in the comments as I've as I was reviewing that today.

Excellent. Thank you. And then we can hear from the public commenters.

Thank you. Wanna call your name, please approach the podium. If you are participating via Zoom, please raise your hand so you're easily identified. Derek Barnes and Ms. Asada and Sam Fishman.

I'm almost sure this is a noteworthy pursuit, but it frustrates me as it relates to environmental issues in this city, how you keep identifying things but should never complete anything. So you have lead paint that's been spoken about over and over again and how Oakland has the highest risk for children being exposed to lead paint and we haven't worked through that issue. We have the Police Administration Building and we have several buildings that are seismically unfit. That building has got to be demolished. You haven't done anything.

I'm sure you're doing the same thing or going through the same thing, lead in the water, in these pipes. OUSD has exposed that problem. You haven't even brought that problem up. My point is you're bringing up so much stuff even like with over at the army base. There's so much pollution over there and you're having a free discussion and eliminating you're not Siri.

Thank you for your comment, miss Asada. If I call Janae, you can approach the podium, state your name for the record. You do have one minute. Thank you.

Hello, council members. My name is Sam Fishman. I'm a sustainability and resilience policy manager with SPR, the local public policy organization in the Bay Area. We've been working on the Air District rules for many years now. We're part of the implementation we were part of the implementation working group on on these rules, and I just want to emphasize how broad the engagement and how deep the process that the Air District is going through to ensure that these rules are equitable and affordable for Bay Area residents.

A number of exceptions to these rules are being proposed right now to ensure that they're that no one is that folks are able to adopt clean equipment, and that folks who struggle have additional time. And, we're really just thrilled to to see support from cities at this moment. We really are seeing last minute actors jumping in and threatening to undo these rules that are really historic and are putting the Bay Area in a in a position to really influence the rest of the country to adopt similar standards. So it's really a critical time for cities to jump in and show that they support these Thank

you for your comment.

Alright. Well, thank you so much. Oh, one more.

Last but not least, Derek Barnes. Good afternoon, city council members again. I just wanted to say most support Oakland's climate and clean air goals. I think they're great. The support transition to zero emission buildings, fantastic reducing air pollution saves lives as we know. But I want to offer a note of caution. I think some of these items were brought up before from a housing and community development perspective. Most of Oakland's naturally affordable housing is old. Multifamily buildings on average in Oakland are like over 70 years old. And so just know that there's significant retrofitting that has to happen in those environments.

And so when there's a failure of an appliance, it's usually an emergency and sometimes that takes time to resolve itself. So I think we're all supporting, most of us support this, but we want to make sure that there are guardrails that allow owners that may not have the resources or the time so that there's a lot level of flexibility so they can work through the issues that are going.

Thank you. That concludes your public speakers for item six. We have a motion made by council member five, seconded by council member chair Brown to approve the recommendation staff and to forward this item to the December 16 city council agenda, and that is on consent. On a roll, council member five.

Aye.

Council member Ramachandran.

Aye.

Council member Unger. Aye. And chair Brown. Aye. This motion passes with four ayes. To approve the recommendations of staff and to forward this item to the December 16 city council agenda, and that is on consent. Moving to item s seven. As this item needs an urgency vote, as this item was added at the three day agenda as well. I just need a motion.

I'll make that motion.

Second.

Thank you. We have a motion made by council member chair Brown, seconded by council member Ramachandran To approve the urgency finding for this item on roll, council member Fife?

Aye.

Council member Ramachandran? Council member Ramachandran? Aye. Council member Unger? Aye.

And chair Brown? Aye. This motion passes with four ayes. I will now read the item into record. Adopt emergency ordinance one, repealing current Oakland municipal code chapter fifteen twelve, the Oakland fire code, two, adopting and making local amendments to the 2025 edition of the California model, building code, California code of regulations title 24 part nine, also referred to as the California fire code, three recoding said code as a Oakland municipal code chapter fifteen twelve, and four adopting California Environmental Quality Act finding. And you do have three speakers for this item.

Excellent. Thank you so much. So I believe on this item we'll be hearing from our fire marshal White White as well as assistant fire marshal Smith and then Michael Hunt is also on here as well to answer any additional questions. Thank you.

Good afternoon, members of the community economic development committee. My name is Darren White. I'm serving as the current interim fire marshal for the Oakland Fire Department. And it's our pleasure to be here with you this afternoon, and thank you for giving us the opportunity to present and share some information about the adoption of the 2025 California fire code. We have proposed amendments, and I'm just gonna briefly speak to you about a couple of the benefits of the 2025 fire code adoption.

And then I'm gonna turn it over to assistant fire marshal, Javin Smith, so he can do the bulk of the presentation. But the the first thing I wanna emphasize is that the Oakland Fire Department is seeking to ensure that we can continue to provide for public safety by preserving our operational necessity as outlined in some of the code amendments that were proposing to be adopted. I also wanna stress that we've actually been working closely with the Oakland Department of Transportation, going back a few years now. And my predecessor, the former fire marshal Felicia Wanz O'Brien, along with assistant fire marshal Smith and others have been working collaboratively to review the design and the proposed projects that have been coming forward for the safety of our community and our streets and the general public and their goals of reducing risk and potential injury to that public. And then lastly, one of the benefits is that we're seeking to provide the guidance necessary to ensure that we reduce any potential delays in our permitting processes by ensuring that developers and others can rely on the fact that we have standards that have been adopted and certain provisions of the code that have been adopted.

This is supported by not only Oakland Fire Department Fire Prevention Bureau, but also the Oakland Department of Transportation as well as our planning and building partners. And then lastly, I wanna just give appreciation to the bicycle pedestrian bicycle and pedestrian committee and their willingness to listen to us, to share their concerns with us as we continue to try to design and do the things that we believe achieve as much flexibility as we possibly can while preserving our operational necessity. And so at this time, assistant fire marshal Smith will give an overview of the importance of the adoption of the code that we're requesting.

Good afternoon. My name is Javin Smith. I'm the assistant fire marshal, for the city of Oakland, as mentioned. We have a slide presentation that we'd like to share with you, PowerPoint that will help describe, our situation. So this is, as was mentioned, the 2025 California Fire Code amendments presentation. If we go to the first slide, we'll talk really about what it is just so we have an overview. So the California Fire Code is part of the California Code of Regulations. Triannually. It's published and updated. We must adopt it.

That is a fact. And so we do. However, this document is a statewide document and therefore is intended to be modified for specific jurisdictions because every city has different issues, problems to face. And so built into the code is this ability to amend it, and that's why we're here. We're on that three year cycle, and so we're going to need to make the amendments.

The majority of the amendments carry over from previous cycles. If we go to the next slide, you'll see there's really only there's four new things to discuss. The first two bullet points you notice there, I won't get into the weeds too much about them. The first one is just color coded fire department connections. What that just means is we're requiring the connections in buildings that allow us to pump water into them will be color coded so that our responding apparatus and members have a very clear understanding what they're pumping into. That's all it is. Very minor change. The second one there you see is inspections of smoke dampers in commercial buildings. This is, already in the code. They're required to inspect these dampers.

However, the language is vague as to who should do that and, how is that presented to, the jurisdiction that has authority, which would be us. And so all we're doing is just modifying the existing code to require certification by someone who is in a position to make this examination, which we already do in other areas of the fire code. For instance, fire escapes have to be certified every five years, standpipe systems, sprinkler systems, every so many years. In a very similar way, we're just requiring that there is inspection of these smoke dampers in commercial buildings, smoke dampers control flow of smoke in the HVAC system if there was a fire. The second two items on this slide are topics that have come up before, that we've had part of the code or proposed to be part of the code.

That's section five zero three, which talks about the minimum width of fire access roads. It defines it as 20 feet. And then appendix d, which adds to section five zero three with more detail and talks about the need for even wider widths for some streets where buildings are tall and therefore require taller ladders. So the next following slides are in there to discuss these two amendment changes. So section five zero three.

Chapter five of the fire code is adopted by the state except for one section, which they leave to every jurisdiction to decide if they would like to adopt or not and amend or not, and that's section five zero three. You'll find it in previous amendments of fire code 2022, section five zero three was there. However, if you just go back one slide, that word adopt, we've included in the language because the language is a little vague. It showed that we amended five zero three, but we placed adopt and amend to clear up any misunderstanding to show that, yes, we are adopting this one particular section that the rest of the state has to adopt specifically. It's not done automatically when you adopt the code.

So we just wanna show that word. It's important. Small, but important. The next slide talks about a specific area in five zero three that is very important, and this is the width of roadways, fire apparatus access roadways. How wide should they be?

Well, the code dictates 20 feet, and there's a reason. This has to do with the ability for apparatus to park at a scene, operate at a scene, and still leave room for other emergency vehicle apparatus or other vehicles to pass. And in some slides coming up, we'll see why that's very important. So that's why this dimension of 20 feet is a very important number to have. It gives us a minimum width that would allow us to operate in a safe manner and access buildings throughout the city.

And that is that is we are adopting at section five zero three. Now the next slide moves into appendix d, and I just copy and pasted this language from the first paragraph of appendix d to show that what appendix d really is is it just adds more detail to section five zero three. It gives a little bit more direction. Now specifically, appendix d, its major use, not its only use, but its major use has to do with planning and developing multifamily residential developments, large subdivisions. We're building bigger buildings.

What do the roads need to look like in these areas? Brooklyn Basin, Wood Street. Right? Large buildings with large amounts of population require access roads that are wide enough. And in times of emergency, these large buildings, and Pengstee talks about buildings that are 30 feet in height or or larger, require access by aerial ladder.

Therefore, we need 26 feet, a little bit larger, to access these buildings. If you go to the next slide, that's the section of appendix d that we feel is very important. And unobstructed with a 26 feet because of the need for aerial apparatus access. When we deploy the outriggers, which stabilize our aerial trucks to then throw a ladder to a building, that takes up some space. And that's why appendix d prescribes 26 feet.

So these are these are two amendments to the code that we we feel are absolutely necessary for our operational needs. If you go to the next slide, you'll find this is not unique to Oakland. Region around this region, fire departments adopt five zero three in appendix d because of the operational need that exists for them as well. So you'll notice cities surrounding us, Albany County, Berkeley, Fremont, Richmond, Santa Clara. We took, you know, a heat map kind of the Bay Area.

This is a this is a general practice. So this is not something unique that we're proposing or an amendment that is not the norm. This actually is the norm. And if you go to the next slide, you'll see visually what we're talking about. So on the left side of the screen there, you'll notice there's an aerial truck. Its outriggers are extended, but we still have room for an engine which, you know, has hose and water and equipment to operate at the same scene. And this becomes very important. What is you should notice about this picture also, there's still room for parking. You'll notice there's a white vehicle parked there on the right side of the screen. But this is not a high rise.

This is a one story warehouse in East Oakland. Sometimes there's this misunderstanding that the only need for an aerial ladder is to get to a tall building, and that's not true. We raise these aerial ladders for all types of operations, and one of them is defensive operations like you see here in this picture. And having room to do that is very important. If you go to the next slide, it's a fire from Chinatown a few years ago.

You'll notice that, yes, aerial ladders are thrown, but there is room for our engines to operate within that space next to the the trucks. And and again, this is not a high rise, but this is a building that requires quite a bit of personnel and equipment to be brought to the roof to do a large amount of work. And for our aerial apparatus to get to these places, we need the room to work. And so 26 feet is what is required by the code to make that happen, and that's what we plan to follow. The next slide takes us into that high rise environment.

Again, this is West Oakland two years ago. And and the reason we wanted to show this slide is oftentimes the focus on this 26 feet or in the 20 feet has to do with, oh, can a rig get by? Yeah. A fire can a fire truck get by? But that really doesn't encapsulate the whole complexity of of what we're trying to accomplish on these streets. What you'll notice there in the foreground of that picture is the number of apparatus at this high rise incident. It's over a dozen. Engines, trucks, medical, apparatus, supervisors, battalion chiefs. So the space to operate is not just about a lane. High rise response requires quite a bit of space, and this picture is very telling.

And the importance of this kind of operation is seen in the next slide where we come to understand why this is this is not a light issue or this is not something we can kind of shove to the side. This really involves the lives of individuals who, because of the ability to operate and throw these aerial ladders, were saved from what could have been tragedy. So we wanted you to see these photos to understand the the space that's required to do the very important work that we're doing. So then that that leaves a question though, you know, is this everywhere? Are street widths, you know, just kind of blanketed across the city?

We're supposed to enforce these? And the answer to that is no. The reality is there are needs of many in this city, our bicyclists, our pedestrians, our motorists, of course, response. And so how do we know where we should enforce, the code strictly, where we have room for latitude. And if you go to the next slide, you'll see that really the the beauty of what we've developed is the collaboration between Oakland Fire Department and Oak Dot.

The work that we've been doing over the last few years really has has been massive because by putting us together in the same room and developing the relationship that we developed, we meet regularly, we exchange data, we talk about what's needed, we go out into the field, as you can see there, look at the streets, look at how our apparatus will operate in those streets, and that allows OkDOT to come up with designs that meet the needs of whether it's BPAC, other entities in the city, but takes into account the the response needs that we have. And so this collaboration has been very effective, and we're very proud of the work they've been able to do in designing streets that really are holistic and encompass everyone's needs. If you go to the next slide, you'll notice that this collaboration isn't just in the field, it's in the design process. So as projects, are put on Oak Dot's desk or come to fruition, we discuss them with them, and we've done multiple. It mentions here 33 projects to date, but this slide is some months old, so it's quite a bit more than that.

But we all come to the table to make sure that our plans really include the needs of everyone. Now I wanna just back up a little bit in the next slide, kinda back out kinda wide angle a little bit because it's not just about, you know, appendix d, section five zero three, and the fire code is not just about Oak Dot and Oakland Fire. It's much bigger than It's about the city as a whole. And because of new state laws that have really increased housing development and has lessened the opportunity for fire I mean, planning and building department to place conditions on approval of these projects on a case by case basis, having the fire code sections like appendix d and five zero three as part of the fire code is an absolute necessity to answer the development questions that come up. When planning construction and building, where are these buildings going to go, what's the density like, is this something that the City of Oakland is going to benefit from or be harmed by, having these regulations are very important, appendix d and five zero three.

And additionally, and this is what I think we're for this particular committee, think it's an important point, you know, development and building and seeing Oakland grow is extremely important. And streamlining processes, permitting processes, and make sure that businesses and developers can actually successfully work here is an extremely important point. And having regulations like five zero three appendix d does that. It streamlines it. It gives us minimums that they have to work within, and they can go ahead and and plan and build as opposed to, let's leave out, let's say, a minimum number and let it be a discussion.

Well, now we've just extended our process of plan review by weeks where we discuss and talk about on every case by case basis how wide the street should be. It's very frustrating for developers, and it's very difficult for us as a city. And then finally, you'll notice the very high fire hazard severity zone is listed as a point here. And this is where, especially when it comes to planning and building, these fire codes become very, very important because with the state laws that allowed increased house development, overpopulating certain streets, dead end streets, tight streets in the Oakland Hills, and the very high fire severity zone poses a very, very serious emergency issue. And evacuation routes and ingress and egress and our ability to, work in those areas is of high concern.

And so having appendix d and five zero three as part of the fire code really just allows us to do that job that much better, allows planning and building to do their job much easier, and allows us to work with Oak Dot and plan the street design that's really gonna be best for the city as a whole. And so that's why the last slide you'll notice is our recommendation to just adopt the twenty twenty five California fire code amendments as we proposed so we can get to the business of making the city safer. And so I appreciate your time and if you have any questions, I'd be willing to answer them.

Excellent. Well, thank you so much for the comprehensive breakdown. Really appreciate it. We can hear from the public commenters first.

Thank you. Wanna call your name? Please approach the podium. State your name for the record. Kevin Dolly, George Spees, and Miss Asada.

Hello. George Spees with Traffic Violence Rapid Response. I wanna thank the fire marshal's office for the their engagement with Oak Dot on developing the appropriate per project requirements for traffic safety balanced with emergency response. And in fact, I like it so much that I'd like them to continue in that process. Primarily focusing on what does this project need here?

What about this block right here? Because as we as we go through this process we see that each location offers its own unique necessities. And so codifying these specific requirements into the rules that that mister Smith has been talking about gets us to a place where that flexibility kind of comes off the table. I don't want to get in the way of doing what is necessary for making the city safe and for allowing the professionals in the fire marshal's office to do their jobs. But I also want to make sure that

Thank you for your comment.

Kevin Dally, Transport Oakland. Sixty seconds is tight for a 150 page document. But this is not an emergency. These amendments encourage wide streets which lead to speeding, which lead to death and injury. Let's pull out appendix d in ICC section five zero three.

Three years ago, with council member Fife's help, we pulled out appendix d and sent it to public safety committee. It was to be heard early twenty twenty three. OFD decided not to hear it. They decided appendix D was not necessary and they could function perfectly fine for the last three years without D. Why do we need it now and why is it an emergency when it wasn't an emergency three years ago? ICC section five zero three twenty foot width. State code already requires 20 foot but allows shoulders to be included when it is safe.

Thank you for your comment.

Does that conclude? Oh, one more. Oh, sorry, Ms. Assata.

Forget about me now. I know over at St. Benedict's there was a consideration of the width of the fence had to be a certain width for the fire truck to get into the property because the property is completely surrounded. So within the code is there identification so the width of the in the case of a fencing? Okay. Yes. Okay. All right. So, I guess we worked that out. The other thing I'm concerned about is gated communities.

I used to live in a community in order to access the property you had to put in the code. And we called the fire department and they had to wait for somebody to let them in. So is there any guidelines for gated community where you have to have access to all codes? Don't answer me because you're not supposed I'm a act like you're supposed to answer me, but you're not. You don't have to. The other thing is the the ADUs that sit back

Thank you Ms. Lassada.

Yeah. Thank you so much Ms. Lassada and the public commenters. You know hopefully the leadership from Oakland Fire Department can stick around and maybe answer some of those specific questions. So council member Unger I'll call on you.

A couple of things. First, I know most of the discussion here is around the bicycle stuff. I wanted to introduce a quick amendment that I passed around around what you were talking about, the fire smoke damper certification. This is a essential piece of life safety equipment in buildings to prevent smoke from getting from one part of the building to another. And I just wanted to I don't know, Ktop, do you have it?

Yeah. I wanted to add in two places just to make sure that we're using properly supervised and licensed contractors. Otherwise, the risk is, you know, it's gonna be like building owners getting my cousin Joe to certify the smoke dampers and he owns a bowling alley, but he can do this. So just like to introduce this amendment to certify the contractors.

Excellent. Thank you council member Unger. Council member Ramachandran, do you have any questions or comments on this item?

No. Thank you.

Excellent. Well I really appreciate the briefing that I received prior to answer any of the questions that I had. And so I will move this item with the amendment. Amendments to I

have a couple of other questions as well.

Okay. Go ahead.

So do we need a second on that amendment and to vote on it?

Yes.

Should we do that however you wanna do

it? However go go ahead with your questions.

My my other questions are gonna be about the bike and pedestrian stuff. So if you wanna finish this off we can just So I have a motion to adopt those amendments.

Excellent.

Okay.

Second. You can go ahead

and

answer Okay. Your

this doesn't require that every street have 26 feet near high rises or 20 feet. This is just a starting point for discussion?

Correct. It's a minimums that is set forth to start the discussion, but what we found best practice is working with Oak Dot is to look at their site specific street plans and then make decisions based on the operational needs of that specific site. So no, does not mean a blanket requirement for street width throughout the city. That would be impossible.

And and I I you know, the public commenters said that they were worried that this would foreclose future collaboration and future discussion with the fire department. Is that your understanding?

No. Quite the opposite. Actually, the the collaboration between us and Oak Dot has done nothing but increase and the relationship has gotten better than it has ever been, and we can plan to continue it. We have plans for projects in the future, and those plans will be considered on a case by case basis, and the collaboration between us will do nothing but increase as far as we can see.

Through the chair, Darren White. And to to further, ensure that the collaboration and the collaborative spirit continues, we've discussed, recently an invitation to the BPAC for some of our training so they can see firsthand why we're requiring and requesting certain things for our operational necessity. And so we have a Recruit Academy coming up in 2026 as an example. And so we're hoping that members from the BPAC can come to some of those drills and see firsthand in a sterile environment and then perhaps later on in a more realistic environment why we operate the way we do and what the clearances that we need are for that very reason. So we're hoping to incorporate them into some future activities as well. Great.

Thank you.

Excellent. Council member Fife.

Yes. I know that there's a motion and a second on the floor, but I'm I'm a little confused because you all sound so positive about the relationship with BPAC but I heard them publicly ask for this item to to pull a section out. Have has there been conversation through the chair to either of our fire representatives? Has there been conversation about that specific aspect about the width of the streets and where did that end?

Yes. And so madam chair, the the the relationship that that we'd like to highlight, the the the the great relationship that we really appreciate, first of all, is the the relationship between Oakland Fire and Oak DOT, Oakland Department of Transportation, because it's our two entities that really collaborate to make street design possible. Now BPAC is a component in that relationship, and we've made it a point to attend BPAC committee meetings, collaborate with them, listen to them. They, of course, also communicate with Oak Dot. So we are all involved.

BPAC has voiced some concerns about certain parts of appendix d and five zero three, and their concern is that it might hinder the work that's been done to ensure that there's protected bicycle lanes, pedestrian access. And so it's been our goal to reassure them and communicate with them that that is not the case. We will continue to collaborate. We want there to be protected bike lanes. We want the city to have a healthy safe environment for everyone to get around.

We just wanna ensure as well that emergency response is not hindered. So the relationship that we've had with BPAC has been actually very good. We've had open conversations, attended their meetings, and we want that relationship to continue. And that's what the fire marshal brought out. We have reached out to them to have them come and look at some operational, you know, exercises that we're doing so they can kind of understand our point of view.

So is it possible through the chair to to pull that part out? Does it is there an emergency right now that requires a decision be made this? Because I'm hearing from members of the public that there is emergency, but I'm hearing I I wanna get an understanding from you because I am deeply concerned about speeding and how the width of our streets contributes to so many of the settlements that we have to approve in our closed session and how many accidents occur because of speeding and I do see environmental design as a way to mitigate the the challenges that come from reckless drivers like create the environment where they that can't happen. But I want to understand from OFD's perspective just more on that because I didn't hear much about the the width of streets in the presentation in a way that could have me support this with with that particular clause in there?

Excellent. Understood. Excellent question. So, madam chair, yes. The the the I'm gonna speak first to the emergency clause. So is there an there the emergency literally just lies with timelines. So come January 1, the new 2025 California fire code must be adopted. And so the goal is to have the amendments prepared and agreed upon prior to that January 1 date. And so the last council meeting, I believe, is December 16, therein lies the emergency. It's a time constraint so that these amendments are ready to roll January 1 when, the 2025 code comes into effect.

And then as far as the street design and using street design to mitigate speeding and and, you know, dangerous behavior in vehicles, the fire department 100% agrees. In fact, you know, we're we're the ones that respond when there is a vehicle accident and there is, you know, vehicle violence. And so lowering those numbers absolutely is a priority. The concern is how we do that. And while it may seem that maybe pulling a section of of the fire code might aid in that endeavor, the opposite is actually true.

It limits the fire department's ability to weigh in on and help design these streets. It also then has a greater impact on planning and building, development, densities of population. There's so many other nexuses to appendix d and five zero three and other parts of the fire code that even go beyond the street planning portion that removing it would be irresponsible. It would not be in the best interest of street design or mitigating some issues we have. We want to keep having those conversations and in a more fine tuned approach make those right decisions.

So can you say just and this is my last question because we do have another committee and I I wanna hear I think we have more speakers. Why did it take so long for this to come forward?

So the the fire the fire code so twenty twenty five fire code was released mid July. We got physical copy of it July, beginning August. Then we had to start the tedious process of reconciling the new code. I should have brought a copy of it with me. It's very large.

But madam chair, we have to make sure that our amendments match the new code. And where that becomes a problem is each code adoption changes the the the framework of the code. So what used to be an amendment that referred to, let's say, chapter one fifteen, that's now chapter one sixteen. So what they required was for us to line by line go through this code and literally make sure that the referenced amendments match what's in the new code. To add to that complexity, and we did not bring this forward at this time, we will bring it later, a whole chapter of the 2022 fire code was removed, chapter 49, which deals with wildland urban interface.

That chapter was removed and a whole another document, a standalone code, the WUI code for 2025 was created, which required us to now examine the pages of chapter 49 amendments that were on the books here in the city of Oakland and find them in the new WUI code line by line. So the the body of work that it took to bring these amendments for just to bring the already existing amendments up to date with the new 2025 code as well as match those with the reference documents from NFPA, UST, a number of documents and make those all correlate so the references are correct was an undertaking. And so we apologize for the time it took but to make sure we got it right we wanted to take the time.

Any other questions or comments?

Could this pass without all of those amendments legally if amendments were to be made early next year or no?

Well, madam chair, the the the the the the come 01/01/2025 fire code is law and must be adopted. That that's so if if if we didn't pass the amendments at this date, then we we would not be able to enforce any of the amendments that are already on the books. We'd have to go by the standalone California 2025 fire code as written until those amendments are passed. So that would provide a problem for even past amendments that we have on the books.

Excellent. Thank you so much. And so thank you. I'm just kind of hearing all of the work that went into actually getting to this point. Just really want to applaud you all for that due diligence.

I think you know there's a couple things that I really heard in your presentation right. On one of the slides it outlines how regionally our neighboring cities have already adopted both Appendix D and Section five zero three. So it seems like we'll be kind of following suit as far as adopting those. And then I think also the most important thing that I also heard was that even in this moment with the adoption you know with the adoption of these changes what's most important is the continued partnership and collaboration with Oak Dot for all of the future projects to come. And that's really going to inform a lot of the decisions around street safety, slowing cars down and those are all things that are actively still taking place if that's correct.

Yes ma'am 100% Yes.

Alright. And so I think there was both a motion and a second to adopt the amendments including council member Unger's amendments. And if you want to just confirm it looks like that's in section nine zero nine of the code section g one and two and the amendment just states is employed and supervised by a licensed c 20, c 61, and d 62 contractor. And then and then that exact same language is in g two as well. And so those are the two amendments.

Correct. Thank you. Okay.

Thank you chair Brown for the the clarity of the amendments. We have a motion made by chair Brown, seconded by council member Unger to approve as amended the recommendations of staff and to forward this item to the December 16 city council agenda on consent with the amendment stated by chair Brown. On row, council member Fife? Aye. Council member Ramachandran. Aye. Council member Unger. Aye. And chair Brown. Aye.

The motion passes with four ayes to approve as amended the recommendations of staff and the four decide on to the December 16 city council, and that is on consent moving to open forum. When I call your name, please approach the podium, state your name for the record. If you are participating via Zoom, raise your hands, you're easily identified. We will take in person before Zoom speakers. Blair Beekman, Prescott chair, Derek Barnes, Kevin Dolly, and Mississauga.

Transport Oakland, sixty seconds didn't give me enough time to say everything. It's misleading to say that appendix d has been passed by a lot of other districts. Many cities are removing it. I believe San Francisco already deleted. I have to double check.

I think Berkeley is removing it for this cycle. Again, I need to double check. It is many, many places are removing it. We received presentations at the BPAC committees on best practices which is remove the fixed hard coded limits and have fire department and DOTs work together. They've done a great job OFD. Give them a lot of credit. And I think whether or not it passes, they'll continue working together, but it's better to not have street widths hard coded. They can work together with or without the code, with or without the hard limits. Thank you.

Moving to our Zoom speakers. Marcus Johnson, please identify what name you signed under.

Prescott Chair.

Thank you. Please start your one minute comment.

Thank you. Earlier, there was a mention of a meeting held in in council chamber, I believe, coming up with the ENA Costco, DELCA discussion, and it was stated, I believe, that the details were provided on social media. My request is that since I'm signed up with on the newsletters of the council, and they also have my email address, if they could forward me that detail of the meeting because I don't do social media. Thank you.

I was just asking the the fire department if they're responsible for the mandated requirement that defibrillators be available in certain public buildings. I know they're required in athletic gyms and some other places. And I don't know who's responsible for the implementation of that requirement. I just want to remind you again that you are not responding to the request that being a sanctuary city, what is the economic impact of that Because you go more than just protect from ICE, you provide services and resources. And unemployment for African Americans is close to 9%.

Gentrification is a I've seen people talking about gentrification, but you never put it on the table to discuss the impact of gentrification economically and related to housing as well. So the fact that you avoid this means that something is being done or not done that potentially really impacts

Thank you our for your comments, Ms. Fazada. I apologize. And that concludes your public excuse me. Moving to our Zoom speaker once again. Blair Beakman, please unmute yourself and begin your one minute comment.

Hi. Thank you. Thank you. You saw my hand very much. Yeah. I wanted to quickly comment in San Diego, the city council meeting right now, they have an overflow of people talking about the future of flock in San Diego. They're having the same issues of flock on how do you if we should be supporting it in the future of San Diego or if we can look for

a new

vendor. The choices are possible, and we're asking the questions in San Diego, the same as in Oakland. So really good luck that this item is actually becoming that we can talk about it openly and question, And that is the key first step. If we can do that, well, that's half the argument, half the battle. That that invites dialogue and questions, and I think we can ask good questions. So good luck how we can be continuously doing that in Oakland and and working with San Diego on these issues. Thank you.

That concludes your public speakers for open forum.

Excellent. Alright. Thank you, everyone. This meeting is adjourned.