Public Works Committee - Regular Meeting

Hello everybody. We are just waiting until we have quorum and then we can get started. Okay. I believe we have quorum. Let's get this party started.

Good morning, and welcome to the Public Works and Transportation Committee meeting of today, Tuesday, 01/13/2026. The time is now 11:32AM, 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 fill one out and turn into a clerk representative to my left, your right before the item is read into record. Online speaker requests were due twenty four hours prior to this meeting.

The meeting came to order at 11:32AM. Speaker record speaker cards will no longer be accepted to the meetings after the meeting has again began, making that time 11:42AM. With that, we will proceed to take roll. Council member Agayo? Present. Council member Houston? Present. Thank you. Council member Wong? Interesting. Ah, here. Thank you. And chair Unger?

Here. Here.

We do have four members present. And before we begin, chair Unger, do you have any announcements for us today?

No announcements.

Thank you. Moving to our first item of the day, which is approval of the draft minutes from the committee meeting on 12/09/2025. And we do have zero speakers for this item.

Okay. I will make a motion that we approve the minutes. We

have a motion made by chair Unger, seconded by council member Gaia to accept to accept the draft minutes of the committee meeting on 12/09/2025 as is on roll. Council member Gaia? Aye. Council member Unger Houston? Aye. Council member Wong?

Aye.

And chair Unger? Aye. This motion passes with four ayes to accept the draft minutes of the committee meeting being held on 12/09/2025 as is. Item two, determination to schedule outstanding committee items. And you do have two speakers for this item.

Alright. Let's hear from our speakers, please.

Thank you. Wanna call your name, please approach the podium. If you're participating via Zoom, please raise your hands so you're easily identified. As practice, we will take in person speakers before Zoom speakers. Miss Asada and Kevin Dolly.

I'm asking for the following topics be considered for discussion in this body. Where's the clock system?

If we can have K Top deploy the clock, please. Thank you.

I haven't started. Can you can you put it back to okay, that's fine. Thank you. We need to have a discussion on the role of Park and Rec Advisory Board and where they have authority to make recommendations or to make decisions. We need to have a report on the tree cutting permitting process.

We need to have a report on projects, how they are funded related to the streets. Ticketing of stolen cars needs to be brought up. Broking parking meters in the city, cleaning up of debris from sewers, because a lot of flooding took place in Oakland because those there was debris in the sewer entrance and we need to know how to clean up. Lawsuits related to transportation the number of city vehicles not being used and just sitting in that parking lot over there contracts that may involve possible contact with gas lines if they're doing work. Protected bike lanes by district.

You've got some districts like 6 And 7 And 5 that don't have any protected bike lanes and that's a bias. Encampment cleanup and security contract updates so we can get this done, and don't wait until staff comes here and say, We didn't have a chance to do this, we didn't have a chance to do that. And lastly, any meetings related to public works like last night, that organization was taking private information and putting in some computer system, I refuse to take part in that. So any meetings that are being held that the city participates in, make sure that privacy is not invaded.

That concludes your public speakers for item two.

Alright. Staff anything on the pending report?

Betsy Lake, assistant city administrator. Nothing from the administration.

Okay. I will make a motion that we approve the pending list.

We do have a motion made by chair Unger, seconded by council member Houston. To accept the termination scheduled not standing committee items also known in your pending list as is on roll. Council member Gaia. Aye. Council member Houston. Aye. Council member Wong. Aye. And chair Unger.

Aye.

This motion will pass us with four ayes to accept the termination of schedule outstanding committee items as is moving to item three. Adopt a resolution authorizing an agreement with the Montclair Village Association for the operation of the management to the Salle Garbage, excuse me, Garage located at 6235 LaSalle Avenue and the Scout Lot located at 2250 Mountain Boulevard for a period of five years and the annual compensation for 295,000 including $275,000, two reimbursable operating expenses, 20,000 in management fees for a total amount not to exceed 1,476,000, waiving the competitive proposals, qualifications, solicitation requirements, waiving the local and small local business enterprise requirement, and adopting the CEQA findings. And you do have eight speakers for this item.

Why don't we hear from staff first, please?

Good morning, chairperson Unger, members of the committee and the public. My name is Michael Ford with the Department of Transportation. The item that you have before you, this morning is concerns the city's off street parking program. Since that program was established as article 27 of the city charter in 1955, the city has relied on professional contractors to operate and manage city owned garages and lots. This particular item concerns two facilities in the Mount Clair Commercial District.

The the LaSalle Garage consisting of 305 spaces and the Scout surface lot with 28 spaces. Since the garage was first built in the nineteen seventies and expanded in the eighties, the city has turned to Montclair Village Association or its predecessor, the local business improvement district, to operate and manage the facility. This arrangement is similar to other arrangements we have at other city owned garage, all of which are managed by third parties. Since I started working with Daniel Swafford and the Montclair Village Association team in 2013, I have had only positive experiences. Montclair Village Association has consistently earned its customer service incentives.

And I do not recall ever receiving a complaint about the garage operations or the conditions of the facilities. LaSalle Garage took the lead about four years ago when our garages went gateless. This friction, low friction, and relatively low cost of controlling access and revenue at our garages effectively integrates on street and off street parking payments and enforcement systems. In doing so, we were able to avoid a costly new parking access and revenue control system which would likely have costed the city between 2 and $4,000,000. The recommendation that you have before you today include waiving the competitive process, adopting CEQA findings, waiving the SLBE, LBE requirement, although I understand Montclair Village Association will be securing its certification soon, if not already, and authorizing staff to finalize and execute a multi year agreement with NVA.

This concludes my presentation and I stand by ready to answer your questions or address any concerns. Thank you.

Questions, council members? Council member Houston.

On the hires, will they be hiring Oaklanders to staff be staffing?

Through the chair. Council member Houston, this is this is the same operation that's been in place for years. So my my expectation would be that they would continue to do the the same thing that they've been doing. We could enlist Daniel Swofford to let us know who his current staff is and to understand if they're actually Oaklanders. I'm not sure if Tee and others are actually Oakland residents or not.

Yeah. I like to know that. Okay. I mean because if we're doing the same thing over and over we need some little change especially if we waive in the LBE and SLBE and you know that I'm a strong advocate for that. Who's liable for any break ins and things like that? Is that them or is that the city? Any break ins or anything that's happening on the lodge?

Yeah. Through the chair. So if there if there are any is there any crime, any break ins? So all of our operators including MVA are responsible for carrying insurance. So they have garage operators insurance. They're they're expected to indemnify the city. They would take the lead on any lawsuits and these sorts of things. So that's that's one of the advantages of having a professional operator is they're sort of our first line of defense.

Thank you.

Thank you, through the chair. So I've seen your projections that you're anticipating that with time that we're going to get more and more revenue and actually have a net gain. Can you just explain these projections?

Yeah. Through the chair, thank you for the question. So the master fee schedule includes rates that allowed us to recently change the hourly rate at the garage, and that was in order to make sure that we were covering the rising costs over the last couple years. In Mount Claire Village, we have implemented demand responsive parking where we have premium zones and value zones.

Uh-huh.

And we've we've wanted to treat that garage as if it was a value zone to try to drive people to the garage rather than taking the spaces on the street. So this still matches the lower prices in the core of the district. So it's a little bit more expensive, but it's still a value and it will help us cover the the costs, the increasing costs over the last I couple of

know this is not a scope, but I I would want to explore how to expand that demand responsive model across the city since I know not every neighborhood has that. And then just to clarify the fees that we see in table two, those are all set by the master fee schedule that we voted on like last spring basically?

That that's correct. So through the chair, our parking operators, whether it's Montclair Village Association or Wellington And Chinatown or City of Oakland parking partners, they're implementing our direction. We're we're directing them how to manage the garages and the city council sets the fees. We do have the flexibility in the master fee schedule. If you look at in the public, we do have the word max in the master fee schedule.

And that's been there for quite a long time before I came. And that was designed so that we do have a little bit of flexibility. So if a garage has a six hour rate, we would be able to go below $6 but we wouldn't be able to go above $6. And that way we're able to flex a little bit.

Interesting. Yeah. Okay. That's helpful. And final question is just on this whole customer satisfaction incentive fee. Is that something that we have citywide?

Yeah. So through the chair about eleven years ago, we implemented this template for our scope of services for off street parking and it included a customer service incentive. Basically what that does is it has our operators actually do a customer satisfaction survey. So they're actually getting data and input from their customers to make sure that they're responsive and doing a good job. And it's that data that is being

they evaluated don't try to game that system to increase their own revenues?

Yeah. So they they supply all of the backup data and we're able to to validate that it's not being gamed.

Got it. Great. Thank you.

Council member Gaio.

It's Montclair, the business improvement district. What other sites are and I know there's one in Chinatown. Who's who's actually overseeing or monitoring the daily parking?

Yep. Through the chair. Thank you for the question, council member Gallo. So we have approximately 20 off street parking facilities and they are managed in different ways. Montclair Village Association is responsible for two. In Chinatown Pacific Renaissance Plaza is managed by Wellington Montclair Village acquisition. And then we have an operator called City of Oakland Parking Partners, which is responsible for a large portfolio. Includes City Center West Garage, includes Del Zeel Garage in 250, Franco Franco Gala Plaza, 1800 San Pablo, a host of other ones.

So so the money that is being generated by by the individual parking lots, who who in the city is accountable or monitoring what is being generated?

Thank you. Through the chair. So all of the off street parking operations, the public parking is a program within Oak Dot. That's one of the many programs that is in the parking and mobility division. And so myself and my staff are responsible for working with the Mount Clair Village Association. We do monthly operation reviews. We do tours. We respond to issues. And then those operators are responsible for making sure that the the revenues are properly collected. We're using ParkMobile and IPS multi space pay by plate meters.

And those are all of those revenues are deposited directly into Citibank accounts. And so all all that ultimately we're paying back to our operators are authorized expenses and small per space management fees.

Okay. So so the money that is being generated within the city of Oak, we're monitoring the amounts. But those amounts of dollars that are generated are going to what department? The finance department directly?

So through the chair, the fund Multi Purpose Reserve Fund seventeen fifty is has been used as the de facto off street parking fund for decades. And so when we receive revenues from our off street parking operations, are recorded in 1750, which is a part of the general fund. So it's basically all general funds. And but the program itself is has been part of either Public Works or since DOT was created, it's been the off street parking program's been managed by Oak Dot.

So we would be able to to identify the the amount of revenue generated by the parking lots that we have on an annual basis considering the fact that we're challenged financially. And I can assure you the next year, we're gonna be having a difficult financial time. So but we can recognize where that money's going. And so the last question that I have, there are other city parking lots, for example, like the one here at City Hall. It was open for many, many years, but it's been closed for now years.

They could generate more revenue. Could become account I mean, a a safe place to park for anyone coming to City Hall or coming downtown. What is keeping that lot closed still?

Through the chair. So you're referring to Clay Street Garage right here Yeah. Behind City Hall. So it was red tagged. It was deemed seismically unsafe back in 2016, and it was a decision to close it in the interest of public safety. And as far as the how it will be disposed of in the future, I'm not aware of any specific plans. There have been some reports brought in the past, but it's it's been a couple years since Yeah. Like economic workforce development and others.

And I still recall that 2016.

Was 2016. December 2016.

It's been closed since 2016. Where's the administrator in terms of getting that active so we can put it back to use? Because Freeman for council member, it was a primary location to park, to come to city council meetings. And not having to park on the street where, like, one of our employees, they stole her car in front of City Hall and they broke into my car twice coming to a city council meeting. And so if the city administrator can give a report back, when are we gonna take care of that property that's been closed since 2016 that could be a revenue generating location for the city of Oakland? Thank you for the information. Thank you.

Yep. Anything

else? Council members. Alright. Why don't we hear from our speakers, please?

Thank you. Wanna wanna call your name, please approach the podium, state your name for the record. If you're participating via Zoom, please raise your hands so you're easily identified. We will take in person before Zoom. Tammy Byrd, Keith and Keith, Daniel Swahard, Andrew Jones, George Spees, Mississaata, Kevin Dolly, and Blair Beekman.

Good afternoon Chair Unger, members of the committee. My name is Daniel Swafford. I'm the executive director of the Montclair Village Association and the managing partner for the Montclair parking operations. I also serve as the director of the Temescal District, Laurel District, and work closely with other districts around Oakland for the record. Just wanted to say thank you.

It's been an honor to serve in my tenure for the last fifteen years in supporting parking operations in the Montclair District to honor the history of the parking garage. The merchants of the district helped finance originally the structure back in the seventies when it was just a parking lot, adding a layer, a story, and then two more stories in the eighties. And really valued how important it is to incorporate parking into the economic activity of the district. In working with DOT since they took over the role of facilitating parking, we've been able to pilot multiple programs in the district including flex parking district wide about ten years ago, as well as the gateless program that the city was wanting to do and saw the facility there as a way to see how that would all come together. Proud to have some wonderful staff, to your question, council member, four part time staff, one full time manager, three part time staff.

Two of them live in Oakland. One of the four was recently displaced but lives close by. They've all been there for, well the longest, almost twenty years, and have a great relationship as ambassadors to the community, to make sure the facility is safe, to make sure the people that come to the facility, whether they're regular monthlies or visitors, know that Oakland is welcome, welcoming them, help orient them to the commercial district and answer any questions that they might have for Oakland at large as very knowledgeable and caring individuals. Just want to

Thank you for your comment.

Good afternoon. Hope all are well. My name is Andrew Jones, Oakland born, raised, resident, and business owner, and also the chief operating officer for the Uptown Downtown Community Benefit Districts. I'm here today in support of Daniel's motion or item, but also just to kind of highlight something. Partnership is the key to these bids success and you can see it here in the DOT's partnership with the Montclair Association.

We all know that. That this private partnership, private public private partnership that we formed over the last few years is critical to downtown success in these business corridors. I just wanna highlight one of the most impactful partnerships that we've had over the last seventeen well, really since they took over from OPD in the past, you know, seven ish years is with DOT around parking enforcement and and parking lot management. So I'm here as as just to kind of highlight the need to explore any changes to DOT structure and what they oversee and how their funds and and the projects that they oversee are managed before any significant changes are made. I just wanna say that we are deep in collaboration around issues of public safety, parking enforcement of the nighttime entertainment zones, how the operation of these parking lots are structured and how they impact the community that uses them.

I have been through countless chiefs, OPD chiefs, we've through countless directors of of economic development of of public works in the last seventeen years. The steadfast nature of what we've had over the past five years as we approach these really complicated issues of violence in downtown around our entertainment district. I would just encourage you before any changes are made to the structure that we explore it fully and that we are looking for partnerships and operations. All of this is at jeopardy if you move rashly or without clarity. Thank you for your time. I appreciate it very much.

Hi. My name is Keith Scherholtz. I'm a Oakland resident of over thirty years, a homeowner, and a proud DOT staff person. It's been my great fortune to work for the city of Oakland for twenty six years. This will be my twenty seventh year working for the city.

And for the last eight years, I've worked with Michael Ford and the parking office predominantly. And I am here to basically beg you to do a full investigation of any changes with parking and the DOT. The innovation the the department has shown towards parking revenues for flex time in so many ways has been phenomenal. The commitment of the staff, the idealism of the people in Oak Dot, and the success, the numbers bear it out, of working on parking issues. I please, please, please beg the city council, from the bottom of my heart, to investigate any changes to Oak Dot at all.

And I I have give nothing but praise for Oak Dot's staff, their commitment, their focus on the future, their integrity, their ethics, their commitment to every single positive thing for the city, especially for future planning. And I think that the vision of the city that has been part of the Department of Transportation's original plan, which the city council supported, that integrity has to be held up. So I'm asking people on the city council, please investigate, ask for the hard numbers, ask for the tough questions, for any changes in the current Oak Dot situation. Because from my own experience, twenty six, twenty seven years working for the city, I've never seen any program more successful, better led, with a higher rate of morale. And I've got a petition from the staff to oppose any changes in the current system, and I'd like to leave that with the city council staff.

It's very detailed, and if they have questions, I'm sure we can answer them. Thank you.

Good morning, my name is Tammy Bird, I'm the parking meter collection supervisor. I was just on behalf of some of the members in our parking mobility, I wanna address the finance takeover. It was stated by finance that this takeover intended to improve timeliness, collectability, and customer service experience, but you gotta remember parking is not just customer service, parking is also a field operation combined with policies enforcement and not just collections. Finance does back end revenue, not public facing compliance systems. Moving departments does not fix process bottlenecks.

There was no cost efficiency analysis. There is no service level data showing finance could perform better, this takeover reorg is incomplete, risk of disruption and future reversal is highly likely, labor laws are not satisfied, and no proof of takeover, of finance taking over or approved services. So, I'm just asking you guys please look into all aspects of this takeover. I've been here almost fifteen, almost sixteen years. I put my sixteen years of salary on parking mobility straight up. Thank you.

Council members, hello. My name is George Spees. I'm a co organizer with traffic violence rapid response. We are a, as you know, a pedestrian safety organization. And I'd like to speak also to the meta issue of of how parking enforcement works in the city.

Everyone knows the old saying, build it and they will come. The same thing is true for transportation as it is for bird houses and baseball fields. It's called induced demand by the planners and engineers and has been understood since the early days of automobiles. In this case, my concern is about the rumored move of parking management and enforcement from Oak Dot to finance. The decisions we make about parking will influence the choices that people make about their transportation options.

Because of this, treating parking as a revenue stream, as it would be under finance I suspect, is counterproductive. Decisions about the provision, pricing, and exclusion of parking must remain within the transportation department in order to allow them to actively manage parking as part of the larger transportation system in Oakland. Please require the administration to bring any potential changes to the council through this committee for a wider airing of the issues involved. We must treat parking policy and enforcement not as a revenue stream, but as a dynamic tool for building cities. Effective curb management through smart pricing, exclusions, and other techniques is essential for reducing congestion, supporting local businesses, as you've already heard, and ensuring public safety.

Rampant double parking in commercial districts demonstrates this very vividly. Providing Oak Dot with the mandate to use best practice parking management isn't just about parking and revenue. It's about making Oakland more accessible, productive, and livable for everyone. Thank you so much.

Kevin Dally. I'm a member of Transport Oakland. Live in Glenview, and I am a regular user of the LaSalle Parking Garage, and I even park my car there. I don't just ride bikes, take transit, they do a great job, and I am really concerned about the city administrator's plan to move parking from Oak Dot to finance, especially without public input. 2013, City Council passed the parking principles, twenty sixteen, sixteen, Oak Dot was created, and parking was part of Oak Dot from the beginning.

If there is a desire to move parking, let's have a clear public discussion about it. Both councils should approve and allow for public input. Not only do I oppose it, but as I understand it, all or most of the business improvement districts in Oakland oppose the move of parking. I've communicated Savlyn Krauss, think, damn, lost her name. Please, any council members, talk to the business improvement districts, including Jack London, including MacClair Village Association, there is opposition for moving it.

By carefully planning the rate of street parking especially, you have one empty parking spot on each block, it means there will not be as much traffic of people circling trying to look for parking. There won't be as much parking in bike lanes, there won't be as much parking on crosswalks and blocking ramps. Please preferably keep parking in Oak Dot, but if there is a desire to move it, discuss it first. Thanks.

Hi, Blair Beakman. Thanks for the previous public comment. I've been attending Oakland public meetings for ten years now, and there's there's a long tradition of bouncing programs around from one department to another. And I don't know exactly why that happens yet, but I I do know the pattern. And I thought a nice suggestion was made previously to have a bit more public input to the process, maybe more appropriate for our Oakland future, but I'm not sure.

But it's certainly an idea because there's something, there can be some good arguments for keeping programs in specific places that, I mean, it just makes sense that Department of Transportation would be housing parking issues. In addressing this issue and for other parking facilities structures that were mentioned here, there was no mention of the technology involved. I don't know how important that is and and relevant to this beginning subject matter you're talking, But it should be a part of upcoming conversations definitely. And how the technology can be accountable for the parking structures. Actually, you know, if you work with the ALPR, you know, data collection, you know, that often is taking tickets and stuff at parking facilities these days and stuff.

That actually can make for really good examples how to practice tech accountability well and how to practice good policies, bring those policies to the PAC, then share them with the community, you know, or, you know, just the ways to make it an open, accessible process with technology issues using the parking facility programs. I think it offers a good practice how to do our technology practice as well. Just a reminder. Thank you.

We off topic, aren't we? We're not on the agenda item. We're talking about parking, so I'm a throw myself into this conversation and try to get back on the subject. We need to look at parking. It's not working.

We got double parking going on in Chinatown for years and nothing's going nothing's being done about it. We've got citations being placed on stolen vehicles, and when people recover their cars they're being charged for parking illegally when their vehicles had been stolen. We have parking that is going on where you have parkings in certain areas and times around Lake Merritt, different times. Over here, you have parking till 01:00 in the morning. Who is having oversight over illegal parking if it's going on in there.

They don't have it going on. We need a review of parking. We have the parking and towing component of the RVs and all those vehicles where people homeless people are, and we haven't gotten a report. You've got people today giving you recommendation without a performance evaluation. Somebody is saying this group has been here doing it seventeen years. Where's the performance evaluation? So, why would we have a contract for five years when you're dealing with a deficit? You don't have to have a five year contract. With that $295,000, where is that coming from? I think I identified where it was coming from.

But if you look at the report, they've been losing money. And they're projecting that one year out of five they made money at one of these parking sites, but they are projecting they are going to make money. Why does this organization, the Montclair Parking Association, why do they want to have oversight of this? Would be my question. What is the benefit of it for them? When there is a parking citation, they when does it who goes in there to give citations? Is it our parking people or do they have their own people giving citations? And I could go on and on. But I want to see numbers that say for seventeen years the

Thank you for your comments.

That concludes your public speakers for item three.

Alright. Councilmember Houston.

Yeah. I would like to know, doesn't have to be answered here, but was functions of this, it says right here oppose or take over finance. Was the finances in the finance department before it was a DOT and then it came back or can I talk to this right here? Can I speak can I talk to this? Is it out of scope?

Through the chair Celia Warren, office of the city attorney. I believe we are parking lot and that the public speakers connected parking issues broadly, but I think when we start questioning things that they have given us related to their Right. Sort of tangent is a little bit outside of Brown Act.

Okay. Got it. Got it. Got it. Okay. Thank you.

I have a question. Actually, back to staff as it relates specifically to the Montclair parking lot. Thank you, Michael. I just to comment, I I think parking is really critical for our goals to revive our small businesses. I hear that consistently especially in Chinatown, how important it is to well frankly they want to lower the parking costs and I'm wondering on the flip side I've also heard from our parking operators that the operating expenses have gone down and so for example the Grand Avenue parking lot has started to get just covered in like illegal dumping, encampments, things like that.

So I'm wondering how do we arrive at the operating expense? This particular proposal is $295,000 per year. How do you arrive at that decision? And then when we wind up voting on the master fee schedule, are these operating expenses the things that then drive that dollar amount when it comes to the cost that we put on our parking garages? Thank you.

Through the chair. Thank you council member Wong for the for the questions. Concerning the the expenses, we are asking for a contract capacity that provides us what we consider to be based on experience and an understanding of what the costs are to be the necessary and sufficient minimum costs of of running the the garage. And no more no more, no less. And in terms of the as you were alluding to the fees that can be charged, going back to the the rationale behind having a little bit of flexibility in the master fee schedule, setting an upper limit but then giving us the flexibility to to fluctuate.

That that's a great example of where we are we do wanna make sure that we're cost recovering. We obviously wanna maximize revenues but but the purpose of the garages as stated in the city charter is to add value to the surrounding commercial district.

Mhmm.

And that's why it's so important that we partner with a partner like Mount Clare Village Association because they have an intimate understanding of what the needs are for the district from a business perspective, from a community perspective. And so we're able to work with them and make sure that the hours are appropriate, that the various types of programs, whether it's Sunday, Saturday programming, whether it's evening programming. And we actively try to manage the garage to cover costs, maximize revenues, but ultimately add value to the to the commercial district. And that's true of any area. And then you also talked about some of our surface lots, not Scout Lot, but Lake Park lot under five eighty.

It's challenging. Over the last five years, the amount of illegal dumping, encampments, crime, the the amount of incidents that our operators are responding to is putting a real strain on our capacity. And and we're doing the best that we can but it's just that the challenge is going up and we're trying to keep the cost low. So that's why there's sometimes a disconnect and people feel like we're we're not responding fast enough or we're not doing a thorough enough job, but we're really trying to do the best we can with the limited resources we have. And that's all part of what your direction as a parking policy, your parking principles that were adopted in 2013, they charged staff with actively managing the parking system.

That's what I think I was just describing when it comes to managing actively managing a garage like LaSalle.

Okay. And that operating expense, the 295 per year that you're asking for, does that directly influence the actual parking fees that we charge?

Through the chair. So in this case, as I mentioned earlier, the LaSalle Garage is part of our demand responsive parking.

Okay.

And we wanted to treat it as if it was a value zone. So people would go directly there instead of parking right in front of, you know, Pete's or one of the other businesses there. They go there if they don't mind walking a little bit and they could pay a little bit less. Now we've had to recently increase the rate, I think a dollar an hour, and we've done that in order to make sure that we're still cost recovering, that we are making sure that we're able to keep up with rising expenses. And what are we talking about?

We're talking about insurance. We're talking about the cost of maintaining the elevator, of repairing the lights, of making sure that the stairwells are clean, salaries of our ambassadors. So that's what we're trying to balance and meet the needs of the commercial district.

Okay. That's helpful. I'll make a motion to adopt the staff recommendation.

We got one more question from council member Houston.

Yeah, that's Through the chair Michael Ford. So if there's a ticket inside I just wanna get clear in my head. If there's a ticket inside somebody parked in a handicap zone, who tickets them?

Thank you. Through the chair. I appreciate you asking the question because I know some of our public comments were concerned about how the garages are being operated and enforced. So in fact, because we're a public agency, we have the ability to use codes and enforce with our parking enforcement staff. So we're able to bring the same technicians who are driving through the commercial district enforcing yellow zones, enforcing meters.

They drive into the garage and they're actually using vehicle mounted license plate recognition technology so that they can efficiently drive through the garage. The parking permits, either monthly parking permits or transient hourly permits, they automatically go into the ALPR system. So when our technicians are driving down aisle, they'll come across the car and the license plate will say no permit. And then if there's no permit, they get out and verify that, put a citation on the windshield. That citation is just like a citation that we issue on the street, goes through the same process.

And so the the off street parking and the on street parking from an enforcement perspective have been completely integrated. And this goes about four, four and a half years ago when we came to council and explained that it was in the best interest of the city to go gateless and utilize the resources that we had for managing on street by extending it to off street. So I hope that answers your question.

Sorry. I have one more question. So this last I went to Walnut Creek with my mom. They had, like, free parking for three hours. I'm, like, how do we compete with that? So what are the other cities, especially because they're, I assume, also governed by the same cost recovery. Are they just providing subsidies? What are what are they doing to to make their their parking garages so affordable? Do you know?

Yeah. Through the chair. So parking is local, local, local.

Uh-huh.

And so it can vary considerably from one part of Oakland to another. And certainly if we go to other municipalities or other areas that the the cost structure can vary considerably. And so but what we're trying to do is make sure that we we charge the right price. We wanna charge the lowest price to achieve the maximum utilization. And and that's where we say we'd like to see a block or a garage about 85% full so that people are not hunting for it and they're able to get in there.

And when we're able to lower the rate, we will and that's what we call value zones. But generally what we're trying to do is make sure that there's parking available for customers and visitors and that's what, like, meter rates are used for.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. We have a motion made by council member Wong, seconded by council member Gaio to approve of staff and the four decide until the 01/20/2026 city council agenda on consent on roll. Council member Gaio? Aye. Council member Houston? Aye. Council member Wong? Aye. And chair Unger. Aye.

This motion passes with four ayes to approve the recommendations of staff before this item to the 01/20/2026 city council agenda and that is on consent. As a reminder, item four regarding the Measure DD grant agreement, Land Trust Watershed Acquisition was withdrawn from this agenda and rescheduled to the 02/10/2026 Public Works and Transportation Committee agenda. Moving to item five. This item requires an urgency vote. I would just need a motion.

So moved. Do we have a second for the urgency vote?

We have a motion made by chair Unger seconded by council member Gallo to approve the urgency finding on on roll. Council member Gallo? Aye. Council member Houston? Aye. Council member Wong? Aye. And chair Unger?

Aye. I

will now read the item into record. Adopt a resolution authorizing the city administrator to negotiate and enter into a delegated maintenance agreement with the with Caltrans to include the maintenance activities such as weed abatement, litter, and debris removal on ramps and off ramps, ex two, accepting appropriate appropriating up to 375,000 from Caltrans in connection with the agreement, and three, making CEQUA findings. And you do have three speakers for this item.

Why don't we hear from staff first if we have anyone?

Good afternoon chair and members of the committee. My name is Cesar Macias. I manage state and federal affairs for mayor Barbaralee. Thank you for advancing this item forward. I just wanna say this is a top priority not only for the mayor but for the city of Oakland.

We've been in many conversations in partnership with the city administrator and public works and our state partners to ensure that this agreement includes Oakland's requests and we believe that this will also help advance one of Oakland's main priorities which is to keep the town clean. I also want to mention Kristen Hathaway from Public Works is here if the committee has any questions about this item. Thank you.

Alright. Council members, questions? Council member Houston.

Hello, good morning. Through the chair, so on those sites, it was 57 sites prior to this. Are they going to be a part of the same 57 sites? And which sites are gonna be worked on? That's one question.

Yeah. I'll to Kristen to answer that for you council member Houston.

Okay.

Good morning council members. Kristen Hathaway, Oakland Public Works. Through the chair, the Oakland Public Works crews did a site assessment and chose a subset of the 57 locations that they could safely do since we are doing this work in house. So we have selected 29 locations that we'll be doing.

And who's going to be managing that because I'm real familiar because one of them was council member Gallo's district that was really blighted and a lot of work was put into that. I want to make sure that one, I'm not stepping over I'm a council member, but needs to be took care of in a couple in District 7 also. So who's going be managing that and is it going be data collected with before and afters and just the whole package to show that it is successful?

Yes. So this is gonna be managed by our Keep Oakland Clean and Beautiful division and the team will be providing all of the data to Caltrans and that information we can share as well. It'll be before and after pictures, information on volumes collected and any other services performed like weed abatement, etcetera.

Who will be the excuse me, through the chair. Who will be the manager of that?

John Hillman. John Hillman. Our operations manager for KOCB.

Okay. You said 29 sites of the 57? It's gonna be 29 of

them? Correct.

Okay. Yes. And the other ones remain under Caltrans responsibility.

Okay. Alright. Thank you.

Thank you for that information. But the reality is we can't even take care of our own facilities that we should be cleaning. Caltrans I mean, International is the state highway and the highway patrol used to monitor that street. But what you have is you have government, the sheriff, or the oh, let's say the county, the state, and the city not cooperating with responsibilities that they have. I do call Caltrans, and they do respond.

It's not the city responding. Even the streets in front that the city should take care of, they're not doing it. But when I call Caltrans, they're the ones that come out and clean under the freeways. But yet, the city does not enforce the rules that we have about illegal dumping, about the trash, about the homeless activity. We can come and do that in Oakland anywhere we want to, but the city is not enforcing that rule.

So for me to take on additional responsibility that I can't even take care of my own property and then take care of what the state is accountable for, and that's the area that's been missing for years. And I have to go to to Caltrans office on Grand Avenue to help me out when Saint Giles wants to use their parking under the freeway. I have to go ask them so they can open it up because Caltrans has secured some underneath the freeway because we don't deal with the homeless encampment and all that negative activity that's there impacting our streets. So my only concern, since I clean the streets every day, and I know the Caltrans people, I don't know if you have the numbers. I mean, I call them directly, they come and take care of it.

But it's out of control in Oakland, so my only reservation is I am gonna take on additional responsibility where I can even take care of what I'm supposed to be taking care of with OPD, Oakland Public Works. And so so for me, I just wanna make sure that that that if it's Caltrans property or they take care of it. It's a Falameda County. They take care of it. And not having us, you know, jumping out there we're gonna get an additional 25¢ to be able to do that where I cannot even take care of my own home.

So so I just I mean, those are my reservations and to as opposed to holding, Caltrans accountable for dealing with their streets, dealing underneath the freeway, and dealing with the on and off ramps, and dealing with 42nd Avenue as a state highway. They should be cleaning it. But, you know, we're waiting what we're doing as volunteers picking it up every day. Anyway, so I think that have you had that communication directly? I mean, we used to have it monthly with Caltrans as the leaderships.

I used to run public the parks and recreation, but they were there taking care of their state properties. Are you meeting monthly with them to make sure it gets done? Because I don't see that happening.

Yeah. Council member, first of all, I wanna acknowledge what you're saying, and we I understand we included special language in the agreement to ensure that that the cleanups don't interfere with already scheduled city priorities. To your point about meeting with Caltrans, we do meet with them. We have a collaboration meeting with the governor's office every month. We're actually meeting this Friday.

There's a collaboration meeting to discuss partnership with not only illegal dumping, but also our homelessness crisis. And those are happening monthly with the supervisors, Caltrans, the governor's office, and the mayors in in our districts. And I know some of the council members have joined those conversations as well. Council member Houston joined one a couple of months ago. And I don't know, Kristen, if you would like to add more about how we are addressing overtime in this agreement.

Gonna receive 375,000 from Caltrans to take care of their property.

Yeah. Through the chair. We have had previous agreements with Caltrans to maintain their freeway ramps. This is very common where they have agreements with local jurisdictions. We previously had a $1,600,000 CCMA, Clean California Maintenance Agreement with them and we did contract out to a third party. Since this is a relatively small agreement for a limited amount of time, and we're only gonna be working on overtime, to get this work accomplished, and we don't have any other budgeted overtime, it's not it won't interfere with our other priorities. Yeah.

So just just to get assurances, you you all feel you do have the capacity then because I I think I understand that for example, the weekend blitzes have paused and so I just wanna if say that is something that we want because I've noticed I've gotta say I was in your district council member Houston the other day and it looks like the it's noticeable how much worse the illegal dumping has gotten also in in my district. And so it's not gonna interfere with some of that work here. It's not the same staff or

Through the chair. No. It it is the same staff. We have limited overtime other overtime opportunities because as I mentioned, it's not in the budget and we have only a small amount of overtime for for blitzes at the moment unless other funding is identified. So staff made the assessment to do this additional work. Like I said, it's a pretty small contract. It's probably for a relatively limited period of time were Caltrans to offer more money for a bigger contract. We would look at contracting out to a third party.

Okay. And you think it would it would improve the cleanliness around highway off ramps and what it like is the reason is Caltrans just it's better coordination? What would be the reason that we should enter this instead of say to my colleagues questions instead of just holding Caltrans accountable for doing that cleanup work? Can you just walk us through that?

Through the chair, I mean, I I'm not gonna speculate on what Caltrans resources are, but I think that this gives the city more direct control over litter abatement at specified locations. We know we can we can get to it and we have the funding to do that. I don't know what Caltrans resources are to get to all of their locations across the state. So this gives the city a little bit more advantage in terms of getting to those areas more quickly.

Okay. And I did see San Francisco has a similar agreement. Did they find that in San Francisco that it ultimately improved the cleanliness over there?

I I don't have that information.

Okay. No problem. Thank you.

To the chair because it's coming from the mayor's office and president Chink is on I'll move it and and follow it and trust that it can be done because I've seen it happen before. Thanks.

I'll second it. Any other questions from counsel? Alright. Let's go to our public speakers, please.

When I call your name, please approach the podium. If you're participating via Zoom, please raise your hands so you're easily identified. Kevin Dolly, Miss Asada, and Blair Beakman.

I done seen some asinine things, but this takes the cake. Thank you, mister Gallo. I wish you would have brought it up in the meeting last night that you all attended. We do not have sufficient staff to attend to the blight and illegal dumping that's going on in Oakland, and what dummy thought that we have the capacity to help some other organization with their issue of illegal dumping. And you say it is overtime.

If we got overtime, we got limited staff, very limited staff. So why was this considered? Whoever this came to should have said right away, Oakland is struggling to deal with illegal dumping. I have I go up Keller for two and a half weeks we have had mattresses and chairs sitting with nobody coming to take it away and we've called 311, we made calls, and it's all over the city. Over there at that elementary school, Howard Elementary, went there last night, illegal dumping, dumped all the way in on our elementary schools.

We this is insulting. And for somebody to say because it comes from the mayor and it comes from Jenkins, that gives it a priority to seriously consider it. Seriously consider that Caltrans needs to take care of their business. We don't have the staff. We got illegal dumping to the fact that it is almost impacting our health and well-being.

And to offer to clean up somebody else's area and you don't even know who gets this designated areas, who gets to decide that, Caltrans or us? This is an emergency item? No. This is high class stupidity. We need to work on getting rid of the illegal dumping in Oakland with every avenue, hire more staff, get more money, get more equipment, and then to off

Hi. Thank you. Blair Beakman. Thanks a lot for this item. From the you had counsel items here back in November talking about what to do about the future of unhoused issues.

And it was some ordinance ideas that were pretty I don't if they're ordinance or not, but they were ideas that were pretty difficult to fathom. And we kind of stepped back from it as a community process, and thank you that you did. It needs a bit more thought. From that, we realized, you know, there are serious, you know, trash issues that we're trying to work on and find ways to address. You spent November and December then trying to work on offering different trash measures here at council and committee meetings.

So thank you immensely for that sort of effort. And I think this item is a continuation of that sort of effort. Thank you. Councilperson Gallo has very nicely described what Caltrans really can be doing for this item, and he's made it a very comprehensive approach, what we should be expecting and really working towards for this item in the future. And it should be ways to really ask Caltrans to start doing that sort of work and effort and coordination.

So good luck how you can be doing that. This sounds like it'd be a friendly little compliment to, you know, good Caltrans efforts. And good luck that we coordinate and work that out in the coming months. And that we're working on these strategies together and inviting everyone to this process. I know in being from San Jose, we used to have dumpster days on weekends in neighborhoods where there was unhoused people and housed people bringing them together to bring their garbage and trash into these huge dumpsters. And we collected on a Saturday and it would be a big occasion. Good luck in considering those sort of options as well. Thank you.

Mr. Kevin Dolly, do you wish to still thank you. That concludes your public speakers for s five.

Council member Gaia.

Yes. Am I on? Yeah. You know, another example besides Kaltrans is the railroad. I call the railroad weakling. They come and clean around the railroads because their trains wind up running over people, and I found two, three dead people where the train hits them. I've been there cleaning up the railroad, but they're coming out. So I think it's, you know, Caltrans, the railroad company, and the other governmental bodies need to be accountable. Because not only is that going on with Caltrans, the railroad, but now I'm also cleaning the schools. Because they laid off many of their custodians.

So I wanna make sure that my children go to a clean environment and go back walk back home. And so but I think we need to work with other governmental bodies to make sure that they're accountable for their facilities and their property, And and that's an area that's been missing with the leadership here from administration dealing with the other governmental bodies that, at one time, growing up here in East Oakland, we have always had issues of violence. But I never saw a piece of trash on the street or illegal dumping or people coming into Oakland and trashing it and then feeling sorry for them. So so the bottom line is for a government here from administration, we need to make sure that the other governmental bodies that are here are held accountable. And because otherwise, we're not gonna be able to create a clean, safe environment in this city of Oakland.

Thank you. And

Council member Wong.

I have one more question directed at staff. So for me to vote yes on this, I will say it's important to understand if does by voting yes on this or entering into this MRU, are we absolving Caltrans of their responsibility? Are they fully contracting out to the city the responsibility for cleaning up the areas around the highway off ramps, etcetera? Or would this allow the city to augment Caltrans' effort? Now we can clean up those areas. I think that's an important distinguish a distinction for for me to understand for my vote. So can you elaborate on that?

Yeah. Through the chair, the agreement is giving the city of Oakland the responsibility for cleaning those areas for the period of time in which the agreement is in effect and I would defer to the city attorney's office if they disagreed or had any additional information.

So for example, council member Gayer just mentioned he calls up Caltrans to help with some areas in his district. I do the same. We would no longer be able to make those phone calls and ask Caltrans to support any cleanup efforts based off of that?

Through the chair. Don't believe it precludes Caltrans from coming to clean. Mean they can they have the authority to come clean on their properties at at any time. And again, this is a subset of locate Caltrans locations throughout the city. Okay. So there's plenty of locations that the city is not taking on through this agreement. So that's my understanding of the division of responsibility.

Okay. So we would have the responsibility outlined in the but we could still make phone calls on an informal ad hoc basis. I just I'm feeling uncertain about what this contract really represents now.

Yeah. Through the chair, they are asking us to to do routine litter abatement and weed activities. There are other maintenance activities that happen on freeways that they're responsible for potentially, know, for example, potentially a guardrail replacement on a freeway ramp, that would be Caltrans responsibility. So we have a limited set of maintenance activities that we're taking on in these locations.

Okay. And Caltrans would no longer be doing that and the city would?

Yeah. Through the chair for the period of this agreement they would not be doing litter removal or weed abatement at those specified locations.

Okay. Thank you.

So our our staff will be doing this work on overtime. Is that correct? Correct. And so we're not robbing from their regular workday. We are we don't have overtime money to pay them to do extra work. This is overtime money that we're getting extra from the state to do this work.

That's correct.

Thank you. Councilmember Houston.

I'm I'm very familiar with these these 57 sites and these 20 set 29 sites. And what happens is is that we need to start prosecuting similar with council member Gayos. We need to prosecute, right? And some of these individuals are in our city dumping on city property and it flows over to Caltrans property and then the city looks bad because they're only cleaning up a part of the city's property and not cleaning up Caltrans. And while they're out there, I'm very familiar with this.

So it makes sense for this to happen in those areas if you guys are not familiar with the 57 sites or the 29 sites that they're picked. It's a property line and people come and dump and it goes over to Caltrans and while they're out there they're just able to clean up city. And then it looks like they didn't clean it, fully clean it so they could be cleaning up the Caltrans spillover at the same time. So I understand and that's why I said I wanted to see the 29 sites because I'm very very familiar with it. And it just makes the city look bad if they go out there and clean half of it when they're right there and they're getting paid and they're cleaning the other portion of it.

So I'm in full support of it because I'm very familiar with it and it's needed. It makes the city look bad if they go out there and clean half of it because people don't know that that isn't Caltrans property at that time on those 29 sites. So I move this.

Council member Wong.

One more question. So just to get assurances, do you think that the city will ultimately be cleaner as a result of this agreement? Yes or no?

Yes. These are prominent locations throughout the city.

Okay. I mean I think the idea of accountability for our state departments, I like that idea in theory. I think in practice it's really hard to do that so yeah.

Excellent. Thank you. Okay.

We have a motion made by council member Houston checking it seconded by chair Anger to approve the recommendations of staff before deciding to the 01/20/2026 city council agenda on consent. On roll, council member Gaia? No. Council member Houston? Aye. Council member Wong? Aye. And chair Anger? Aye. This motion passes with three ayes, one no. Gaye? To approve the recommendations of staff and to forward this item to the January 20 city council agenda, and that is on consent moving to open forum.

I think it would be on non consent if we had a a dissenting vote.

On non consent. That is correct. I'll restate the motion. That is a motion made by council member Houston, seconded by council member chair Anger to approve the recommendations of staff before this item to the January 20 city council agenda, and that is on nonconsent. Moving to open forum. When I call your name, please approach the podium. If you're participating via Zoom, please raise your hands. You're easily identified. Charlton Berks. Excuse me if I mispronounce your name. Kevin Dolly, and that's Blair Beakman. And miss Asada.

Public works available through the weekend. Everybody's working. They're gonna do this project over time. You know what that means? They're going to be working at night. Our staff works from eight to five, or eight to six, over time is going to be at night. We don't have any staff not working, because we under staff, and we're working seven days a week. You all some stupid people. And I'll say it again.

If we if we could refrain from ad hominem

stupid stuff, you're going to be called stupid. We don't have no overtime when everybody's working seven days a week. The only overtime would be at nighttime they would be working. The stupid stuff you did with that permitting with the trees. Three years after the trees are cut down, you want to find somebody close to a million dollars. That person wanted to develop the property. For three years, they've been developed they've been denied the opportunity to develop their property. Have you been charging them a vacancy tax because nothing is happening on the property? Then you got staff members that come and you ask them why three years? One says because we understaff.

Another one says it's because we don't have a process to bring this issue forward to hold this person about the property owner accountable. That's stupid too. Three years, then you have an advisory board making decisions about trees being cut down. And I looked at your process, that's supposed to come to you after the advisory board makes a recommendation. I've never seen you come with a decision about cutting down trees. And that's stupid. So I'm gonna speak to this again, Gallo. Thank you. And I hope you bring it up again when it comes to the

Thank you.

And I do apologize. We have a public speaker, Derek Kilgore.

Hello, my name is Charlotte Niles Bergson. I'm a parking control technician over with Oak Dot. And so I just wanted to take a few minutes just to ask that you guys consider when the vote if a vote comes to the floor to pause and for a vote, a vote to pause and to look into and ask for clarity and data for the move from finance to OPDOT. Under OPDOT for the last eight years, we have accomplished so many things, we are full time, we have a cohesive relationship with OPD, department, we're working on hills campaigns and working and managing lakeside. If no other city, small or large in The United States and even in Europe and around the world has parking enforcement under finance.

The reasons that I was given, it was because that's how it used to be, that enforcement is a source of revenue and it's potentially going to increase the salary of some of the finance staff and they're trying to move away from Michael Ford. All of those things have nothing to do with parking enforcement. Parking enforcement is for safety of the citizens, for the community. If you put me under finance and I step out of that vehicle with a big old finance department and like you said, Gayle, we're going to be in some type of budgetary crisis, the citizens are going to look at me as they're I'm here to collect. So I just want to just find out the reasoning why that the city of Oakland is going to move away from a prove proven pro

Thank you for your comment.

Hi. Blair Beekman. Thanks for the meeting today. Thanks, Blair, as a council person Gayle. As the current and hopefully one term Trump federal administration continues to publicly speak and work only in terms of forceful takeover around the world at this time instead of negotiation and dialogue, His continual war posturing and actions is simply exacerbating bad feelings of both law enforcement and the everyday public in his currently overly violent plans of how to address the undocumented in this country.

I hope you can make some changes. It is a tremendous relief that the city of Oakland is finding ways to offer Oakland, the SF area, and this planet ways to more openly question and to more clearly address neighborhood surveillance technology future at this time in learning to leaf flock surveillance. We are trying to address peace, better reasoning, and public participation, and not war secrecy and the needs of harm in decision making. This may be a good example of patience and compromise for all sides and simply may be a shining guiding light in how the new Oakland City Council and the Oakland community can better consider their decision making with future community items. But to again go over some of its continuing questions and concerns, Are we going to be truly committed to find a new ALPR vendor?

To again describe, I feel it can be of help to have something like a six month update to the council or committee and how the new ALPR vendor procurement process is moving forward. And I hope there can be follow-up Oakland committee meetings and open public discussion that reduced placement of surveillance tech in local neighborhoods can often do the same amounts of public safety work as an oversaturation or plethora of surveillance technology placed in a neighborhood. We simply can be working to help keep our federal government in check here at the local level at this time. Thank you. But I have a few additional questions in part two of this public comment at open forum time at the Public Safety Committee meeting today. Please try to review. I will be using Zoom at that time. Thanks for the meeting today, guys.

Hi. Kevin Dally, Transport Oakland. Unfortunately back to some fire code issues. It appears that the fire code as we passed it is a violation of copyright law. I have heard from the International Code Council, Deputy General Counsel from them, they own the copyright for most of the California Fire Code and the International Fire Code, and they have stated that by including the entire Appendix D as part of the fire code, it is a violation of their copyright.

At some point we should come back and revisit it and decide how to fix it. One possibility is we join the lawsuit which opens up the fire code and other building codes so it can be publicly considered. I think that'd be a great idea, but I don't think we should fall into this. I think it should be a carefully decided step to enter the lawsuit rather than accidentally entering it. The other possibility is go ahead and figure out how we can rewrite it so it does follow the copyright law, and make sure that three years from now we're not in an emergency situation where we only have a few days to review the fire code.

Anyway, thank you.

Good morning, everyone. My name is Derek Hilber. I'm the supervisor two for the vehicle enforcement unit. We get the blighted vehicles off the street. I would like to start by saying keeping the current program under Department of Transportation ensures continuity, efficiency, and subject matter expertise. Under the leadership of Michael Ford, DOT's structure is best suited for managing transportation operations, maintaining compliance, and supporting effective decision making. Moving programs to finance could disrupt workflows and weaken specialized oversight. Retaining them under DOT preserves focus, accountability, and operational effectiveness. Also wanted to add that I've been a lifelong resident of the city of Oakland since birth, since 1966. I've been with the city of Oakland since 2006, and I've been managing this unit for the past four years.

We're just about to go full time with our full time staff. Our interviews have been completed. We interviewed 24 candidates, and I would like to say that moving this department, my department to under OPD would disrupt the city and do the citizens a great disharm for each and every one of your constituents. So with that being said, I would like to see our parking I would like to see our parking preserved the way it is. I don't see the reason to move backwards when we got made so many strides moving forward under DLT. Moving back into finance and management would be a total disaster for everyone involved, including yourselves. So with that, I get back my time. Thank you.

That concludes your public speaker, sir, open forum.

All right. I believe that concludes our meeting unless anybody has anything. All right. We are adjourned. Thank you.