Remarks by Dan Arriola
453 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 9 of 19
- Play at 4:05:18
“Essentially, you just stated that if we were to proceed with option three, that you would incorporate something into the negotiation.”
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:09:21
“Okay. With regards to my position, I agree with my colleagues that I think we would need the information from the audit prior to doing any large scale investments. With regards to this project, my priority is what we can do to bring costs down for Tracy residents. And I think those are going to be those large scale projects. However, I also want to make sure that the city has functionality. And I understand that we have already purchased EV vehicles. So I want to make sure those function and don't just sit in a parking lot. So to your point about having the infrastructure be a part of that,…”
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:21:31
“Okay so I would reiterate, so I essentially am, I think we have consensus on supporting three to get that information. However, is it three and? With regards to the purchase THE VEHICLES THAT THE CITY HAS ALREADY PURCHASED. I ALSO HAVE A REALLY BIG CONCERN THAT WE ARE FUNCTIONING. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE UTILIZING THESE VEHICLES FOR DAILY USE. SO I WOULD SUPPORT THE LOWEST COST OPTION TO ENSURE THAT OUR CURRENT EV FLEETS AND THOSE THAT ARE INCOMING SOON WILL BE FUNCTIONAL. SO I WOULD SUPPORT EITHER THE MINIMAL COST OF OPTION ONE WHICH IS 500,000 OR THE VOLT OPPORTUNITY IF IT HAPPENS…”
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:23:49
“Okay. So I would be moving to move forward with option three and either option one at $500,000 or the lesser of a rental opportunity. Second. Does that make sense?”
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:25:03
“Good. Are there any additional questions?”
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:30:24
“So there is a motion on the table. My intention was to roll them in so that when we've selected the bid that they can do the complete evaluation. However, in order to maintain functionality for the city, that we have the short-term either $500,000 or less if there's a potential opportunity for rental, as Council Member Nygaard pointed out. So that is my motion to the table. Council Member Bedoya, was that also your understanding?”
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:35:10
“It was rolling in the option two into three, which is what I heard from negotiation. Correct. Direct bid that is unlawful.”
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:35:46
“I'm going to stop you right there. There's confusion. And staff, this has been incredibly confusing. For the future, this has not been effective. Option three states integrating the EV infrastructure deployment with the citywide energy upgrade program. That is...”
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:36:34
“So option three, there's an opportunity to roll in design build from two to see whether there are any cost savings or not. Correct. That's what my intent is. Okay, so I'm going to withdraw my prior motion because it has been too confusing. So my new motion is to move forward with option three and to include design build elements and then reevaluate at that time.”
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:37:02
“I have a first and a second. Roll call, please.”
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:37:20
“Yes. As to my second motion, as it relates to option one, I would be supporting option one up to the amount of $500,000 or an alternate temporary option, if it exists. Second. We have a first and second. Roll call, please. Mayor Arreola.”
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:37:51
“Okay. Thank you, staff. I think we have some internal conversations to have, and then we'll... Mayor, can I just clarify?”
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:38:20
“That was the first motion, not the second motion.”
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:39:05
“Or does it need to come back for council because you don't have vault on the agenda?”
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:39:42
“Is it clear enough for staff for the record?”
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:39:50
“Okay. So these were informational items that will have to come back from council for affirmation. Fantastic. All right. That takes us to items from the audience. Would any members of the public like to speak on an item not on tonight's agenda?”
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:40:07
“We see one hand. That will be four minutes. Please proceed. Was there a second? I didn't catch that. I think he's working.”
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:41:34
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:43:09
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:45:45
“I guess I have concerns with June already having another flag up during the month. We have. And if there's not a particular, does staff recall what the particular event was?”
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:45:58
“Now, what did Council Member Evans provide you?”
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:46:31
“Yeah, I've received, I've previously received requests for day of Portugal flag, but it was a day event.”
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:46:39
“I'd provide a third for consideration of some raising.”
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:46:48
“That's all I have. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Nygaard.”
City Council · Aug 18, 2026
- Play at 4:53:55
“All right. As for my comments, I just want to welcome back to school our students, teachers, staff, and families. And I wanted to also take a moment to thank staff and this city council for their efforts in finalizing the stipulated judgment to resolve the Surlin litigation matters, which finally ends our final barrier to building an aquatic center. And I very much look forward to that moving forward for this community. With that, I will take a motion to adjourn. Second. We have a first and a second with Mayor Pro Tem. Roll call, please.”
City Council · Aug 18, 2026