City Council - Regular Meeting

All right, good evening, everyone. If everyone can take their seats, we're gonna go ahead and get started. Thank you for joining us for our regular city council meeting of August 14th, 2026. After a short break, we're back and happy to be back in action. We hold meetings in a hybrid format with both in-person and virtual participation available. The city welcomes public comment on topics within the city's subject matter jurisdiction and members of the public may provide comments as follows. In-person speakers will be called first. Speaker cards are located at the back table in council chambers and must be turned in to the city clerk here at the dais. Please be sure to indicate the agenda item number you wish to speak on. Attendees who have joined us by Zoom will be called to speak after the in-person comments have been given. Detailed instructions for public comment will be provided on the screen when the time for public comment begins. And with that, I'll now turn it over to our city clerk to call the roll.

Good evening. Council Member Chu. Here. Council Member Gee.

Present.

Council Member Howard. Here. Council Member Padilla. Present. Council Member Sterkin.

Here.

Vice Mayor Aiken. Here. Mayor Martinez-Abaez.

Here.

Thank you.

Thank you, everyone. And with that, we'll move into the Pledge of Allegiance. Council Member Sterkin, could you lead us?

Please rise if you'd like for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Thank you, Council Member Strachan. And we have all members of the council participating in person today, so we will move through item four. and go into item five. For our first recognition item this evening, we have the pleasure of swearing in newly appointed members of our city board's commissions and committees, or BCCs. On the screen, you'll see all of the names of our newly appointed or reappointed members of the Arts Commission, the Board of Building Review, excuse me, Board of Port Commissioners, Housing and Human Concerns Committee, our Library Board, the Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Commission, the Planning Commission, Architectural Advisory Committee, who are appointed by the Planning Commission, the Historical Resources Advisory Committee, also appointed by the Planning Commission, and our Senior Affairs Commission. If you are new or returning BCC member, please make your way to the front of the dais for the ceremony, and I'll now turn it over to our city clerk to administer the oath of office. Welcome, everyone.

Thank you, Mayor. If you are here to be sworn in, please come to the center of the dais. You can actually face the audience.

Chest.

OK. So everyone's going to raise your right hand. And you're going to repeat after me. But as we start, I will ask you to state each of your names separately. The rest of the oath will be in unison. OK. I. Do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of California that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about to enter. Congratulations. One last quick thing. If you have not already signed an oath of office certificate, please see Julie in the lobby and she'll give you a copy. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you to our city clerk. And again, thank you to all of our new and re-sworn commissioners who have joined us this evening. We really appreciate your time, your passion, and the energy you're giving in service to your community. So thank you again, everyone, for being here. And with that, we will now move to item 5B. Our next recognition item this evening is rooted in the City Council's top priorities of children and youth. International Youth Day is recognized annually on August 12th and serves as a global platform for awareness, dialogue, and youth-led action. On behalf of the City Council, I'm pleased to present the following proclamation, of which I'll read a few of the whereases. Whereas International Youth Day observed on August 12th of every year and observed by many countries is recognized and endorsed by the United Nations as a day dedicated to raising awareness of the potential of young people as bringers of peace, shapers of our future, and agents of change. Whereas the 2026 theme places particular attention on young people living in least developed countries, or LDCs, landlocked developing countries, LLDCs, and small island developing states, or SIDS, who have often experienced overlapping challenges linked to poverty, climate change, geographic isolation, limited economic opportunities, and unequal access to digital technologies. At the same time, these young people continue to demonstrate resilience, leadership and innovation in advancing sustainable development within their communities and beyond. And whereas the City Council is committed to amplifying endeavors that provide opportunities for young people to ensure that they embody their true potential as bringers of peace and positive change. And whereas Redwood City Together employs active youth promotores ages 14 to 18 dedicated to uplifting their community. through weekly outreach, local nonprofit tutoring, professional development, and internships, these young people gained the skills to become strong civic leaders. Now, therefore, be it resolved that I, Elmer Martinez-Abayos, Mayor of Redwood City, on behalf of the City Council and the people of Redwood City, to hereby proclaim August 12th, 2026 as International Youth Day and express its sincere appreciation to Rapid City Together's team for actively taking part in the endeavor to focus our younger generation to make meaningful, positive change for years to come. And with that, I'd like to welcome Rapid City Together's Executive Director, Rafael Avendaño and the team to the podium for remarks and welcome everyone. It's great to have you all here.

Thank you, Mayor. There it is. Good afternoon, city council, city managers, city management staff, and all the wonderful Redwood City and North Fair Oaks community here and also online. We want to thank you for honoring youth in Redwood City and North Fair Oaks on this International Youth Day that brings youth issues to the attention and also international community that we serve. And it celebrates the potential of young people in our community. And also, Aspiration is here, and I can't wait for you to hear it. It's happening every single day in your community through your commitment to your city strategic plan. we want to just thank you for that and reflecting on the city strategic plan we're not just talking about it we're actually doing it and it's here today in person and um as as someone who's been in this community for about 15 plus years starting a youth center to being able to say that we've created over 130 youth jobs in the past three years let's give a round of applause to the city come on That's remarkable. And we are now a state model for California around how to do violence prevention. So again, today, youth from the state-recognized program will be able to share a little bit about what this day means to them. So I'm going to pass the mic to them. So first is Angel.

MY FAULT. GOOD AFTERNOON, CITY COUNCIL AND FELLOW COMMUNITY MEMBERS. MY NAME IS ANGEL LOPEZ. I just want to say thank you for honoring International Youth Day. It's a very important day to me because I'm able to work with fellow community members here, just giving out resources, even to those in low-income households where they need extra clothes or just need that extra resource and need that extra knowledge. So I do want to thank you guys here for being here and recognizing that, and that's really important to me.

Good afternoon everyone. I want to start off by saying thank you City Council and Mayor Elmer Martinez for recognizing International Youth Day. My name is Anya Rodriguez. I'm a current Rebel City Together promotora where I have gained a lot of experience throughout my summer and current job. Thanks to your support in recognizing the recognition of youth and giving us opportunities to learn, grow, and give back to the community, I was able to be a summer intern with Familias Unidas. In the organization, I got to help families sorry, in Redwood City and North Fair Oaks. And I learned what being a leader is like. From there, I got the opportunity to connect with Redwood City Together, where I continued to grow my experiences and just really get to be a part of the community, which is something very important to all of us. And again, thank you so much for recognizing International Youth Day. We really appreciate it a lot.

Thank you so much. In the spirit of youth development, so it stays within this day, we're going to do a strong clap. And we do this after all of our trainings, whenever we train them once a month. And it goes like this, three, two, one. All right, it's a strong clap. In youth development, it's so important that we keep youth energy, no matter the age, right? So in three, two, one. Thank you.

Thank you, Rafael. And thank you to the whole team. I think we just found the new way to end our city council meetings. But we've got a city proclamation. We'd love to take a photo with the whole team. Thank you. Thank you again to the Redwood City Together team. I know you all are heading out the door. Just wanted to remind you, we do have youth and children as a study topic later today, so feel free to tune back in. And we will keep moving on to item six, our public comments. So turning on to the public comments section of the agenda, we'll now take public comment on the consent calendar, matters of council interest, and as well as items that are not listed on tonight's agenda. We welcome speakers providing public comment, but please be advised that this is a limited public forum, and as such, speakers must address matters within the subject matter jurisdiction of the city. If speakers do not, they'll be warned, and if they continue to disregard city rules, their opportunity to speak will be limited. If you're attending in person, please fill out a speaker card and submit it to the city clerk here at the dais. And if you're attending virtually, feel free to raise your hand on Zoom at this time or press star 9 if you've joined by phone. Once we've gathered all the speaker cards and raised hands and have begun public comment, no additional speakers will be allowed to queue up to speak. And I'll now turn it over to our city clerk to facilitate public comment.

Thank you, Mayor. We have four in-person speakers at the moment, and we have six online. So I'll give it a few more moments to either submit a speaker card or raise your hand on Zoom to be recognized for public comment. As the mayor said, once we begin public comment, no additional speakers will be added to the list. Okay, so we'll start with our in-person speakers. If you're joining us for the first time, we have a timer on the top of the podium. The orange light with the chirp is your 30-second warning, and the red light with the beep means your time is up. I'll call two at a time, starting with Emily and then Amber Garza-Washburn, and then we'll move to our Zoom speakers after our in-person speakers. Welcome, Emily.

Hi, my name is Emily. I work five days a week in Redwood City. And every day I get off the exit ramp and pass a flock camera. I know that recently it has been discussed that we probably will not be renewing the flock contract. But I'm here to request the city does not sign a new surveillance camera contract until the public has been given ample time to learn about these types of cameras. AND GIVE COMMENT ON ANY POTENTIAL NEW CONTRACTS FROM OTHER COMPANIES. THE PUBLIC MEETINGS AND PLACES FOR PEOPLE TO LEARN AND GIVE COMMENT SHOULD OCCUR ON MULTIPLE DAYS, DIFFERENT TIMES OF DAY, AND IN MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. AND THERE SHOULD ALSO BE THE OPTION FOR THE CITY TO CHOOSE NOT TO SIGN A CONTRACT AT ALL, WHICH WOULD BE MY PERSONAL RECOMMENDATION. Two weeks ago, I went to the police advisory committee meeting where the police presented their use of flock surveillance cameras. And I don't believe that the Redwood City Police will responsibly use any future surveillance systems. The presentation they gave showed a glaring lack of technical competence and an inability to self-audit and catch problems before they happen. During this PAC, they shared a few anecdotes of times they used flock to solve crimes. But very few of these stories proved that they could not have solved the crimes without the flock cameras, and a couple of them seemed pretty easy to do without that. All of the data they shared was cherry-picked. They do not, they admitted to not keeping track of any negative statistics. They do not keep track of false positive license plate reads, which has happened many times in other cities. They also made a meager show of reforms they implemented, but those reforms only came after heavy pressure from activists, and I don't think that they would do these on their own or for any future contracts. Any new contract will require the public to continually monitor the police usage of its programs in their free time to hold them accountable. Yet, the Redwood City Police have already taken steps to make this difficult, as they removed the reason column from public records requests. Yeah, please don't renew any surveillance technology.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Amber Garza-Washburn, who will be followed by Rush Rem.

Hello, city council members. Thank you. Good to see you again. My name is Amber Garza Washburn. I've been a resident of Redwood City for almost six years now. I am a former prosecutor for Riverside County and for the DOJ US Attorney's Office in Los Angeles. And I also worked as a civil rights attorney, very briefly. So first though I wanted to, so those are my qualifications, and I'm a resident. But first I wanted to thank you so much for everyone who was involved in the decision not to auto renew the contract with Flock. That very well could have happened, and I think you and the rest of the city showed a lot of courage and care in doing that for us. So I'm here as a resident and as an attorney and as a voice for not only my concerns, but for my community. And there are hundreds, if not thousands of us. And there would be more if people understood what was going on. I think there's a lot of... There's not enough information going on, and that's a reason for the town halls that I'll get to in a minute. But I want to say that at the foundation of what I'm saying is a very non-existential very real threat to peaceful resistance first amendment protest bodily autonomy and the safety of our immigrant neighbors families and loved ones this danger is not abstract at one point it may have been but we've seen every single day with this federal government administration just how far they're willing to go uh... i would Ask the council to pause the RFP and give us a town hall. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Rush Rem, who will be followed by Bill Newell.

Hello, thank you for having me. It's my first Redwood City Council meeting. I'm a resident of Redwood City for the past 35 years. I want to call attention to the Council to problems with the water supply, in particular environmental and rate issues. This has to do, as I understand it, with the fact that Redwood City purchases your water from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission. And I have been to some of their meetings and done some work with them. And many people believe that the SFPUC overestimates how much water will be needed in the future. They have a design drought that many people find impossible to credit. Something like 25,000 years is a possibility of the design to happen, but they've made their predictions of water usage on that. and also they over-inflate the possible needs of water supply, even as the population grows, as you probably know. Conservation has meant that water uses remain basically flat, but that is not reflected in the SFPUC's water program. The problem with this, of course, is that ultimately we pay for it. The rates rise in the city, and also, of course, there are environmental damages that I don't need to tell you about. Salmon flows, Bay Delta algae buildup, and so forth. Why am I mentioning this to you? Because Redwood City buys its water from SFPUC. I think they have representatives on an organization called Bosca. And what we would like is local people to stand up for people like residents of Redwood City who are worried about these issues. Since SFPUC doesn't seem to listen to anybody, maybe they'll listen to people from below, which would be us. So thank you very much. One, two, three, hop!

bill newell how do i follow that um good evening council members um thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight um when uh redwood city leaders including yourselves ends the flock surveillance contract you're taking action to keep our loved ones safe and i'm grateful But in the last year, we know 140 San Mateo County residents were taken from our community. Faith in Action has reported that immigration agents increasingly surveil and detain our neighbors when they are driving or getting out of their vehicles. Federal agents will continue to exploit these local surveillance camera systems because they're rich with information collected by local police departments and subsidized by our communities. To further protect our community, we're asking that the city, the city manager, police department, please deactivate all flock surveillance cameras now if we're in the true spirit of ending this contract. has acknowledged real concerns about the flock surveillance contract and the city informed flock that its contract would not auto renew. In May, she asked the police advisory committee for feedback about the surveillance program. Overwhelmingly, they provided input about that moving forward. Unfortunately, the city has continued to go forward with their RFP. When Redwood City authorized the ALPR, city leaders did not know how much surveillance camera systems put community members at risk. Public comments about ALPRs have been shoehorned into many meetings, but the city must give opportunities for meaningful community input, which is necessary when automated license plate readers put Redwood City communities in danger. The city must host at least two town halls that are accessible by language, hybrid format, and schedules of our community. And we ask you to hold those town hall meetings and pause the RFP process until the community has full understanding and full information about AOPRs. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Thank you.

Thank you, Bill. We'll move now to our Zoom speakers. We'll call in the order that hands are raised. And when you unmute yourself, you can go ahead and begin your comments. And the timer will begin when you start speaking. So we'll start with Sylvia Tang. And following Sylvia will be call-in user one.

Good evening, Mayor, council members, city staff, and community members. My name is Sylvia Tang, she, her pronouns, and I'm here on behalf of the San Mateo County Suicide Prevention Committee and San Mateo County Health. September is Suicide Prevention Month, and this year's theme is The Weight We Carry, which reminds us that many people carry emotional pain, grief, stress, trauma, and pressure to be strong. And too often we may not see someone who is carrying that weight, but we don't have to carry that weight alone. And I'm especially making public comment today because I wanted to invite you all to an upcoming event, especially for our veterans, active duty military personnel, active veterans. active and retired first responders, their families, service providers, and community members to join us for our event called When the Mission Follows You Home. And it's a San Mateo County hosted free forum focused on mental health. The forum will be held Thursday, September 10th from 9 a.m. till noon at the Central Peninsula Church at 1005 Shell Boulevard in Foster City. And we welcome all Redwood City residents and our larger Bay Area community. We will have an honest conversation and share resources related to trauma, PTSD, moral injury, recovery, healthy coping, and finding support after service. Registration is encouraged and walk-ins are also welcome. And if you know anyone who is in emotional distress or thinking about suicide, they can call, text, or chat 988 for 24-7 support. Thank you so much.

Thank you, Sylvia. Our next speaker is call-in user one, who will be followed by Jenny Kay.

Hello. This is Gordon Orbison, and I want to talk about an issue of public safety here in Rainwood City. Specifically, I hate trainees. And it's Suicide Prevention Month, and transgender people are not worthy of life. Anyway, Jews did 9-11 and suck baby penis. God bless America. God bless Donald Trump and God bless Israel.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Ginny Kaye, who will be followed by Sarah Matlin.

Thank you. Good evening. My name is Ginny Krause and I'm active with several community groups in Redwood City. Our immigrant community is extremely frightened, hesitating to leave their homes, worried about going to work but having no other choice, worried about their parents, kids, friends, all at risk to be picked up by ICE because, as we have seen, ICE has no boundaries. They have the green light from this administration to arrest, detain, and even kill anyone they choose, even American citizens. i urge this council to not renew the alpr contract with flock or any other vendor whose technology is causing such fear in our community while minimal guard rails have been established by the redwood city chief of police and some crimes have been solved, there is a risk-reward analysis that must be considered. Is solving a few crimes worth risking all of our privacy and personal data that has been shown to be easily accessible by ICE? Do you want your and your neighbor's data exposed to ICE? The federal government trumps local law enforcement, and there is nothing you can do to effectively stop ICE from accessing this data. Flock, in particular, has been hacked. The technical vulnerabilities, of which there are many, have been exposed and are easily accessed by any hacker or one with some basic technical knowledge. Frankly, none of these license plate reader systems are safe. ICE can and has overwritten any guardrails put in place to prevent abuse of the data. So I urge you to review the risk of keeping license plate readers safe. as compared to the rewards the risks far outweigh the rewards with this technology and as most technologies advance in their capabilities we cannot predict the future risks restore a sense of safety to our community stop the surveillance do not renew any alpr contract thank you thank you our next speaker is sarah matlin who will be followed by liz vanzile

Good evening. Thank you city council members for your work every day. You are doing your very best to protect our community. And still in the last year, 140 of our San Mateo County neighbors were taken from our community, many while driving or getting out of their cars. To protect our community members, the City Council should not rush into a new contract that would subsidize that abuse. Instead, the City Manager should hold off on awarding the ALPR contract to a new vendor and negotiating a new contract until we can get accurate information and broad community input about surveillance cameras. The city should host study sessions with all city council members present to be held in multiple languages. The city could collaborate with local nonprofits and other experts to research and implement ALPR best practices to decrease serious risks involved with subsidizing a tool that ICE uses to track down our immigrant neighbors. A few of us are putting together a draft ordinance that city council could pass to include a checklist of best practices to avoid some of the problems that have gotten other cities in trouble or even sued for violations. And that would take into account the information in the grand jury report about the problems that the grand jury found in the city's audit reports, that those audit reports didn't show that the city complied with the state laws and local surveillance camera policy. And the RFP and the police chief's report don't address those problems. So please pause to correct the contract process. Do a more accurate assessment of how the current ALPR system is complying or not complying with California law, our city's surveillance policy, and our city's values. Gather community input about guardrails to protect our community members' safety and privacy. And then, after the city has revised its requirements, consider putting out a new RFP. Thank you.

Thank you, Sarah. Our next speaker is Liz van Zyl, who will be followed by Laura Aiden. Liz, you can go ahead and unmute yourself and begin your comments.

Thank you, Council. Good evening, City Council. My name is Liz Menzel, and a lot of my errands and movement brings me through your beautiful city. I work as an emergency department pharmacist in the South Bay, and a lot of my errands and movement brings me through there, including my meditation center and my local sangha in Redwood City. my work as healthcare professional i've come to appreciate the way that individuals privacy should be guarded and respected our privacy is tightly linked to our ability to authentically and freely move about the world and express ourselves and feel safe doing so i'm reaching out to you because of the pacifica flock contract that the redwood city flock contract that will renew yearly if the council does not vote to cancel it Um, this is really important to me and I humbly ask you to cancel your current RFP process, get community input. Um, this type of data is making us all vulnerable to potential stalking by law enforcement. pursuing of protesters that are coming home from expressing their opinions at rallies. This is incredibly personal to so many of our community members that feel vulnerable right now. including naturalized citizens or people from countries that are not considered up to Trump standards. So this is really important to me as an immigrant. And I urge you to please, please, please consider the most vulnerable among us when you make these kinds of decisions that impact us all. Thank you.

Thank you. Our final speaker is Laura Aiden. Laura, we cannot hear you. You can begin your comments.

Hello?

We can hear you now.

Oh, thank you. I'm just calling about the Redwood Life that the City Council has considered.

Actually, Laura, I'm so sorry to interrupt. That is item 8A on City Clerk Castro.

We actually don't have Redwood Life today.

I am so sorry. I mixed it up with our Redwood Shores levy item. I am so sorry. Laura, please proceed. We're going to restart the timer. I apologize.

No, no problem. It's fine. Yeah, I'm just talking about Redwood Life because they're building out on a toxic waste dump that already has been disruptive and they have to manage that. And I think that's really unwise for them to redistribute that waste cap for, and they're saying over 20 years. And all these biolabs are just, they're not doing well right now. So I hope that they really consider looking at everything and not just going forward because there's some money attached to it. So that's all I have to say. Thank you very much. Thank you, Laura.

Thank you. And if you weren't able to give public comment this evening, we welcome you to email the council at council at redwoodcity.org. That concludes public comment, Mayor. Thank you.

Thank you to our city clerk and everybody who made public comment this evening. We will keep the show going to item seven. Our items on the consent calendar are routine in nature and are approved by one motion. Are there any items on consent from which council members are recused? Council Member Chu.

I will be recusing myself from item 7B as I live one block from the bathroom in question.

Thank you. And Council Member Ruggie. Thank you, Mayor. I will be recusing myself from item 7E. One of the consultants on the item, CTS, is a sub-consultant to me. My business on one of my state agency contracts.

Okay. Thank you both. And do we have a motion for all items on consent aside from items 7B and 7E?

Mr. Mayor, before we go there, I'd like to pull item 7A to add a friendly amendment.

And Council Member Serkan? I wanted to just pull 7i as an igloo for just a quick question. And then, I'm sorry, did you already say 7j is being pulled, or is being voted on separately?

No, that was 7a, 7b, and 7e. OK, I'm missing track here.

May I also just pull for a comment? 7j, as in Jake, please. Thank you.

Perfect, so for those keeping track at home, we have Council Member Chiu recused from item 7B, Council Member Gee recused from item 7E, and we have Council Members who have pulled item 7A, 7I, and 7J. So let's start with City Attorney just making sure we're gonna start with our pulled items before we do any voting.

It may or if you'd like to go ahead and take a vote on all consent items except those 4, 5 just perfect.

OK sounds good is their motion for all the items on consent aside from items 7, 8, the E I and J so moved. Thank you, Council Member Howard. And is there a second? Second. Perfect. That was a second from Council Member Chu. And could we get an electronic vote, please?

Thank you. And we'll take a roll call vote, if that's okay, Mayor. We'll start with Council Member Chu. Yes. Council Member Gee. Yes. Council Member Howard. Yes. Council Member Padilla. Yes. Council Member Strickland. Yes. Vice Mayor Aiken. Yes. Mayor Martinez-Zabayos. Yes. Motion passes unanimously.

Thank you all. And so with that, we'll begin with our pulled items, beginning with item 7A. And so we'll go to Council Member Gee.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. My proposed addition to the motion, given that the bill has not been fully printed yet and that amendments could still happen, is that the motion be amended to also delegate to the Governance Committee any changes pending final printing of the bill. And the reason for that is time is of the essence. This is going to be approved hopefully or possibly August 31st. The bill will go to the governor and the governor then has 30 days to sign and we will not have time to come back to council for any changed position if the final amendment says we've been shared don't materialize.

Mayor, I think that's a wonderful idea because I do realize the urgency. I was hoping that we could just, whether Council Member Gee or a staff member, just very briefly tell the audience what this bill is about.

Thank you, Council Member Howard. I see Michelle going up to the mic.

Good evening, Council. Michelle Poche-Flaherty, Assistant City Manager. This is a bill that is rather complex in a few different ways. It is intended to provide protections to voting rights. Redwood City is one of the cities that switched from citywide elections to district elections and there were some technical questions in the original version of the bill that related to when that was adopted and whether or not if you did it by a certain date or not you would have SAFE HARBOR OR IF IT WAS A DIFFERENT DATE AND SO WE WERE ADVOCATING FOR A HANDFUL OF AMENDMENTS THAT WOULD HAVE CLEANED SOME OF THOSE TECHNICALITIES UP. OUR LETTERS TO THE LEGISLATORS clearly stated that we supported the spirit of the bill and the intention of the bill, but there were technicalities in the bill that would have presented significant financial impacts on the city unless they were corrected. Since that time, the author and co-sponsors have been very ready to listen to those arguments and have made all of the changes that we requested in our letter. And as a result of that, staff has recommended that we switch to a neutral position and our firm in Sacramento advises the same.

Thank you very, very much. I appreciate that. It is very complex, but I was very pleased to see that all of the suggestions that you made were accepted. Whoever that author is maybe should be more involved in writing more legislation because he listens. We were very grateful. Thank you. And I'll second the motion of Council Member Gee if you're looking for a second. Sure.

I'll make the motion as amended. Thank you, Council Member Howard.

Thank you both. We appreciate that and getting some more information out to our community. With that, let's get a vote on, that was item 7A.

We'll start with Council Member Gee.

Yes.

Council Member Howard. Yes. Council Member Padilla. Yes. Council Member Sterkin. Yes. Council Member Chu. Yes. Vice Mayor Akin. Yes. Mayor Martinez-Cevalles. Yes. Motion passes unanimously.

Wonderful. Thank you, everyone. And we'll go to Council Member Stricken for item 7i. Thank you, Mayor.

Mayor, I'm wondering if Council Member Stricken would like to handle both I and Jay at the same time, or if Council Member Stricken has different questions for them. Oh, wait.

Different. Jay is a different topic. It's the courtyard.

Oh, yes, I'm sorry. I thought it was the two cents. Okay, thank you. Please.

Real quick question for staff, I'm not sure if Tanisha's here, but about the stop signs and the selection of the stop signs. One was, I got a question from a constituent about the intersection of Argoio and B Street that isn't slotted for a stop sign, but I'm sure there's a reasonable reason why in that neighborhood, since almost every other intersection is slotted for a new stop sign.

Thank you for the question. Tanisha Werner, Director of Engineering and Transportation. We did look at 14 intersections along the whole stretch, and we can't do stop signs at every single intersection just for circulation and flow of traffic purposes. So that's one of the reasons why that location wasn't selected.

Thank you very much. And if I can just say one last thing, I just want to share appreciation. I know a lot of my constituents and my neighbors appreciate a stop sign being installed at Standish and Warren where there's been several accidents over the past few years. And that was something I heard four years ago when I ran that people wanted. And I just want to thank you and your team for making Centennial safer for everyone. So thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you Councilmember Serkin. That was item 7i. Do we have a motion?

So moved.

Thank you. Do we have a second?

Second.

Great. That was a motion from Councilmember Serkin, a second from Councilmember Howard. Could we get an electronic vote please?

We'll start with Council Member Howard. Yes.

Council Member Padilla. Yes. Council Member Stricken. Yes. Council Member Chu. Yes. Council Member Gee. Yes. Vice Mayor Aiken. Yes. Mayor Martinez-Savayas. Yes. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you.

Wonderful. Thank you, everyone. And we'll go back to Council Member Stricken for Item 7J.

Sorry to take up more time. So with this item, I just wanted to firstly just thank staff for listening to council's interest in a billboard at the courtyard. That was something I know I raised under our previous city manager, and the concept of us being able to, in another way, as we've discussed it this day, is recoup our costs. How do we put it? Our goal is to... How do we put it? It's a couple of cost of services. Somebody help me here. Yes, cost recovery. Thank you so much. Okay. Mayor's on it. So this is just another way that we could possibly do that. So I appreciate staff for looking into design for that. That's all. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Member Strachan. And that was item 7J.

I just want to make clear that that's not all that's in item number 7J. It has many other aspects, and I guess I'll just say I'm not particularly interested in studying billboards, but that's for another day. This would just be, among many other things, to study the possibility of a billboard on the corporation yard land. I second the motion to approve 7J.

Great, so that was a... I'm sorry. That was a motion from Council Member Serkin, a second from Vice Mayor Aiken, and could we get an electronic vote, please?

Council Member Padilla. Yes. Council Member Sterkin.

Yes.

Council Member Chu. Yes. Council Member Gee.

Yes.

Council Member Howard. Yes. Vice Mayor Aiken. Yes. Mayor Martinez-Zabias. Yes. Motion passes unanimously.

Great. Thank you. And before I move on from consent, we do have the recusal items to vote on. So we'll first take up 7B, which I believe Council Member Chu was recused from. Is there a motion? Motion to approve item 7B, as in Bob. Great. Thank you. Council Member, is there a second?

Second. Second.

Perfect. Thank you, Council Member. That was a motion from Council Member Gee and a second from Council Member Howard for Item 7B. Could we get an electronic vote, please?

I'll start with Council Member Sterkin.

Yes.

Council Member Gee.

I'm sorry? Council Member Gee. Yes. Thank you.

Council Member Howard. Yes. Council Member Padilla. Yes. Yes. Vice Mayor Eakin. Yes. Mayor Martínez-Zavallos. Yes. Motion passes with six votes. Council Member Chiu is recused. Thank you.

Wonderful. Thank you, everybody. And we have up next Item 7E, which Council Member G is recused from. Is there a motion?

So moved.

Second.

Council Member Howard and seconded by Council Member Sterkin. Could we get an electronic vote, please?

Council Member Howard. Yes. Council Member Padilla. Yes. Council Member Sterkin. Yes. Council Member Chu. Yes. Vice Mayor Aiken. Yes. Mayor Martinez-Zavallos.

Yes.

Motion passes with six votes. Council Member Gee is recused. Thank you.

Amazing. Thank you, everybody. That was our consent calendar for the evening. So we will move on to item eight, our staff reports. And our city manager, Patrick Heisinger, will provide a brief introduction before turning the presentation over to engineering and transportation director, Tanisha Worden.

Great. Thank you, Mayor. Just two things quickly. One, I just want to express a lot of gratitude to staff. This has been a big lift, and it's going to continue to be a big lift. When you're at 60% design, you still have a heck of a lot of way to go, and so... But you'll hear in this presentation a lot of different methods of outreach, whether in-person, on-site, hybrid, walking tours, whatnot. And there's a lot more to come. So even starting in September is another office hours. So just wanted to let everybody know, please get engaged. Staff is ready to hear from you. In addition to that, I did want to acknowledge that this kind of has been branded as the Redwood Shores Sea Level Project. BUT YOU'LL HEAR IN THIS PRESENTATION HOW IT FITS IN WITH A LARGER PLAN IN CONJUNCTION WITH OTHER CITIES, WITH ONE SHORELINE. SO WE AT THE STAFF ARE STARTING TO LOOK AT THIS AS A CITYWIDE PROJECT. IT DOESN'T JUST PROTECT REDWOOD SHORES, THIS PROJECT OVER TIME. will help to protect billions of dollars in assessed value of real estate and safety, you know, in and around the city. So maybe we could work on our branding, get some more folks to those outreach meetings, because it's definitely well attended. But just wanted to throw that out for the rest of the group that this is something that we're going to be looking at to connect the southern part of the city with the northern part of the city. So with that, I'll turn it over to Tanisha. Thank you.

Thank you, Patrick. Good evening, Mayor, City Council members, staff, and members of the community. My name is Tanisha Werner. I'm the Director of Engineering and Transportation. And tonight I'll be giving you an update on our 60% design for the Redwood Shores Sea Level Rise Protection Project. For tonight's presentation, I will do an overview of the project and look at the regional context in which this project sits. We'll go over a really high-level schedule overview, discuss some of our current public outreach and engagement opportunities, some of the public amenities and improvements that are associated with the project, And then we will be going over two different design alternatives that we are asking for some policy direction from the council in order to identify how wide we should make the levy. And there will be multiple opportunities to further refine the direction, further refine the design. Today's decision does not lock us into one thing over another. And then at the end, we will have time for questions and answers. As you're listening to the presentation, please just keep in mind these two questions. Does the city council support advancing alternative two, which staff is calling the optimized design as the preferred alternative? And the second question is, Are there any additional considerations the city council would like staff to evaluate as the project advances? There are many opportunities for us to incorporate different features if there's something that council likes in one alternative versus the other. And so just having that direction is really helpful once we're at the 60% design level. Our project is at a regional level. Sea level rise doesn't just impact one jurisdiction. When our waters are rising or when we have extreme rain events, water is going to go to the point of lowest elevation and also the point that has the smallest amount of restrictions. It's going to go where it wants to go. It doesn't care if we're called Redwood City, if we're called Belmont, San Carlos, it really doesn't care about that. And so sea level rise is something that our county, San Mateo County, has been looking at at a county-wide level. In March of 2018, there was a county-wide sea level rise vulnerability assessment that went out. This assessment basically said that there are significant areas of impacts to our shoreline and our infrastructure that are vulnerable to sea level rise. Out of that study was born One Shoreline, and they are the county's district to address sea level rise resiliency and flooding at the countywide level. They were born in January of 2020. And then as we move forward, Redwood City has been looking not only at this regional effort, but also a little bit closer to home. In Redwood City, in July of 2024, we put out our Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Study. And this looked at different assets within the entire city to assess where are we vulnerable and what are some potential elements that we can do to improve those vulnerabilities. And then looking into the future, we have a really strong, wonderful partnership with One Shoreline. And they are really banding together with five of our neighbors, Belmont, San Carlos, Redwood City, Menlo Park, East Palo Alto, to do what they're calling a southern bayside resiliency plan. That is future-looking, 2027, but it is an effort that Redwood City will be part of the collaborative efforts on. This is a map showing the San Francisco Bay Area, or Bay Region, that has shoreline. And as you can see, there are multiple areas where different jurisdictions have a portion of the shoreline. And this basically represents one shoreline's reach. The portion in red is Redwood Shores, and you can see that that is outlined in red, but it's actually in a yellow color. If we go to the next slide, we're going to just zoom in on Redwood Shores on its own. This is what our project is looking to protect. The area outlined in blue is the alignment of the current levy project. Just to orient you, I'll see if this is working. Well, never mind. So you can see at the very top of Redwood Shores is a Silicon Valley clean water treatment plant, and then Highway 101 is just below the vertical section of that blue line. Apologies, my pointer isn't working. Next slide, please. So when I say this regional coordination, what on earth does that mean? When we're looking at Redwood City, Redwood City is leading the Redwood Shores Sea Level Rise Protection Project. Our city is leading our project design, our community engagement. We are seeking FEMA accreditation to help protect this portion of our community and also more broader portion of Redwood City. Redwood City is also leading the environmental review, the permitting implementation, and of course taking policy direction from our city council. One shoreline is looking at this regional effort. They're looking at regional flooding and sea level rise coordination for all of those member agencies that you saw on that first map. They are also serving as a person or a body on our Redwood Shores Technical Advisory Committee, and they are leading our five city resiliency plan, which was that future looking plan that will start in 2027. We have a number of regional partners, and these regional partners have shoreline resiliency plans of their own that they have to either move forward or find another way to protect their communities. Each city is at a different spot. Foster City, which is not on the list, they completed their levy. They are accredited, which is wonderful. Redwood City is in design, and that's also a wonderful milestone. There are other jurisdictions that are in either a planning or a design phase. And so I really want everyone to keep in mind this regional context that we are one portion of. So looking at our specific project, our project is being designed to help protect vulnerable assets, to protect our homes, schools, businesses, and critical infrastructure in Redwood Shores. Redwood Shores is home to 31 sanitary sewer pump stations. And all of the flow, not only in Redwood Shores, but all of Redwood City flows through the shores and ends up at the treatment plant, which is at the very tip of Redwood Shores. We're also looking at an umbrella goal of flood protection. We want to protect our community from flooding to really protect these valuable assets. And under flood protection, we're looking at FEMA accreditation in order for our RESIDENTS OR BUSINESSES OR PROPERTIES THAT DO NOT HAVE OR THAT DO HAVE A MORTGAGE ON THEIR PROPERTY TO NOT HAVE FLOOD INSURANCE, WE NEED TO BE OUT OF A FLOOD ZONE. AND WE NEED TO HAVE A LEVY THAT IS ACCREDITED AND THAT IS BASICALLY FEMA'S WAY OF SAYING YOU ARE NO LONGER IN A FLOOD ZONE. WE DO HAVE AN EXISTING LEVY THAT CURRENTLY PROTECTS REDWOOD SHORES. THAT LEVY IS It's there. It is not at a height that FEMA currently recognizes for accreditation. However, FEMA is working really closely with the city and they have put us into what is called seclusion. So they're basically saying that we recognize that your levy isn't at a height to reach current standards of accreditation, but we know that the city is working towards getting there. and FEMA is not placing our area in a flood zone, which would trigger that flood insurance requirement. While we have this really great project, we have other opportunities aside from flood protection. We can look at enhancing placemaking. Our Redwood Shores Levee is a destination for individuals who enjoy hiking, biking, birding, just really being out in nature. And this project is a great opportunity to add in more of those amenities. Looking really high level at our schedule, in July of 2025, our city council awarded a design contract to Schaff and Wheeler to do the design improvements for our levee project. That's really what kickstarted us off to this journey where we are today, where we have reached 60% design, which is a really big milestone for the engineering project. And we are coming before you tonight just to see which design alternative council prefers us to move forward. There are many, many ways to design this project. There's not just one way or two ways. There are many ways. And what staff is presenting tonight is two alternatives that provide the same basic flood protection goal, but in different ways. And then as we move past tonight's meeting, the project team will be moving into our environmental permitting and environmental review. We're anticipating that process to take about two years, and that would be dependent upon securing the available project funding. And then once we have our permitting and environmental review stage, we can move into final design. That's about a two or three year period, and that's where things really start to come together. We can finalize what amenities are really going to be out there. At this stage, we're looking at what is the suite of options that are available to us, and where are some different locations along the alignment those can go. But as we go into final design, that's where everything really just starts coming together. And then once we have all of our construction funding secured, we're looking at a four-year, maybe a five-year construction cycle. So between 2030 and 2034. Next slide. Staff has been engaging with the community since we started this project and onboarded our design consultant team. In the fall of 2025, we released a survey to our Redwood Shores community and received a pretty good response rate of about 481 responses. A slide in a few minutes will show you some of the themes that came out of that effort. But in 2026, we've been doing more community outreach. We've held three community meetings, we've held two office hours, and that is just an opportunity for the community to talk with different members of the project team, an opportunity for them to share any feedback on the design, and also just to get an update on where things are at right now. We have presented at the annual meeting for RSCA and at one of the board meetings for RSOA. And we will have plenty of opportunities to continue the public engagement. There is a dedicated project website, a mailing list. So anyone who has attended our community meetings, we've given them the opportunity to share their experience. email address that we can include them on any email blasts for community engagement meetings that are coming up. We also have coordination through our office hours. So we're really trying to capture as much of the community as possible just to really make sure that everyone has an opportunity for their voice to be heard. Some of that community feedback has followed some general themes. The community really wants a clean, safe, and well-maintained levee and trail system. We're looking for areas where we can add in more access, more connectivity, really looking at what we're calling placemaking. We want the levee to have that same feel that it has right now, where people go there to be close to nature, to really enjoy everything that our shoreline has to offer. We're looking at increasing the natural character of the levee and increasing our viewing spots and interactions with wildlife. There are so many incredible elements that we can achieve with this project and one of the big things that we're doing is flood protection. We're not just trying to do an engineered solution. That is part of it. But we want to make sure that it's a destination as well, something that the community is really going to continue to cherish for generations to come. So some of the public amenities that we are looking at include areas for seating along the alignment, some areas for shade. These are just two examples of what it could look like. Think of this as a starting point. The exact bench doesn't have to look like that. It could be a different color. It could be a different size. But we're just showing that an area for resting along the alignment is something that is possible. And it's something that we're making space for in the design. So one of the questions that I really wanted Council to keep in mind as you're listening to the presentation is what amenities would you like to see incorporated as we continue to advance this design along? Nothing is set in stone in this moment. Everything is open for further refinement. When we're looking at public amenities, we do have some constraints. So a few of those constraints include permitting. This project will be subject to permitting from various state and federal agencies. We have BCDC, which is the Bay Conservancy and Development Commission. They're looking at development along our shoreline. We have to have a permit from them in order to do a project. We're also looking at the Army Corps of Engineers. They're looking at the Federal Clean Water Act and ensuring that anything that we're discharging or putting into the water is safe, is not going to kill the aquatic or plant life. To name another one, we're working with the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. They're looking at water quality. We are right at the water. Nothing is being treated before it gets into the water. That's why we have a lot of federal agencies that are really keeping a close eye to make sure that we're not harming the environment. Those permitting agencies will have different requirements and restrictions. And now that we're at 60% design, we're at a point where we can take our plans to those permitting agencies and start that conversation. What amenities will be permitted? What is a no-go? And now we're at that point. We also have grant opportunities. We do have a funding gap for construction. And there are some incredible grant opportunities out there. By having this level of a design, we can be very competitive for grants because we're showing that it's not just a planning document. It's not just an inspiration that Redwood City has in our mind. This is something that we are actively going towards. And then finally, maintenance considerations. Engineering and transportation can design and build it, and then we hand it over to our partners in public works services. And they are responsible for maintaining it in collaboration with our Parks and Recreation Department. Tonight we'll be going over two different design alternatives. The first one is what staff is calling a baseline design. This design element includes a very wide width of the trail. Our current trail is about 10 feet in width. What design alternative number one is doing is widening that by a factor of two. So we'll be looking at a 20 foot wide trail. This will require extensive ground improvement. In order to add in that extra real estate, we need to have the stability underneath to hold it up. Then because we're widening, there are many opportunities to carve out places for place making, for ecological improvements, for people to get down into nature to extend marsh areas. So this is what we're referring to as alternative number one. Alternative number two is what staff is calling an optimized design. This is a design that's going to have a similar look and feel to what the levee is in its current condition today. The trail is about 10 feet wide with a two foot shoulder and this is wide enough for a maintenance vehicle to drive on top of it. Because we're not doubling the width of the levy, there's not as extensive ground improvements that are needed to make it strong enough to withstand the loads. So they're just what we're calling targeted improvements. And because we're not adding in that extra real estate, there's less opportunities for us to intentionally carve out areas for that placemaking. And so we're looking at very specific locations along the alignment, and that's why we're calling it modest amenities. Thank you. When you're thinking about both alternatives, these are some things that they are both doing. They are both seeking that FEMA plus one height elevation, and this was the policy direction that staff obtained from council in February of 2026. They are both looking at flood protection. Both alternatives will get us out of the seclusion area and get us to a point where our levy can be accredited through FEMA. BOTH ALTERNATIVES ARE LOOKING AT BAY TRAIL ACCESS AND INCORPORATING HABITAT AND ECOLOGY IMPROVEMENTS SO THAT PLACEMAKING, ONE ALTERNATIVE HAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO MORE AND THE OTHER ONE IS JUST SCALING THAT BACK A BIT. AND WITH BOTH ALTERNATIVES THERE WILL BE CONTINUED REFINED DESIGN AND REVIEWS SO YOU'RE NOT LOCKED INTO ANY ONE DECISION THAT HAPPENS TONIGHT. because we're at 60 percent. Next slide. This is a cross-section of alternative number 1. I'm just going to walk you through it. I've got a couple of cross-sections, so just bear with me on the technical part. This is a typical cross-section, so it's not at any one particular person's backyard. It's just what we're calling typical. On the left side of the screen, you'll see in grayed out a home. So this is just to help with orienting you to see what the vertical differences are. Where you see the brown, that is the existing ground surface and our water level is at seven feet and that's just in the bay. this alternative number one will be raising the levy to an elevation of what we call 13.5 and that's fema plus one and then it will be 20 feet wide so that's why you can see everything is just a little bit wider And then this cross-section is showing how it will be raised in the future to meet that 16-foot elevation. And that's as design criteria changes with FEMA, there will be other opportunities to re-evaluate our design for a levy and make sure that we're always maintaining accreditation standards. And then the people at the top are supposed to represent just standard adult sized individuals. So this is another cross section for alternative number one. And in this area, the main difference is what we call a flood wall. So if you look just to the right of the raised pathway, you see a little notch out of a wall. The wall is not extensive. It's about two and a half feet in height. So most individuals will still be able to enjoy the wonderful views as they're going in this area. The flood wall in this location is needed because you can see the water level is a little bit higher and there's more opportunities for wave action. And that's just where the bay is just sloshing up into the path. Okay, let's go to the next one. All right, so now we're gonna talk about alternative number two, which is the optimized design. This is one typical section, and you're not seeing that wider 20 foot wide levy. you're really just seeing a 10 to 12 foot levy, which is kind of mimicking the width that we currently have today. In order to strengthen the ground to hold the levy height to accreditation standards, we have to introduce a sheet pile wall. And this is just a piece of material that is basically drilled into the ground that can help anchor the soils. Everything is on bay mud and bay mud is really squishy over time. It will slowly settle as the water starts pushing out. The sheet pile wall will have what we call a concrete cap on top of it. And that is just, think of a curb. So a curb on top of the metal portion of the sheet pile wall to protect the sheet pile wall and also protect individuals. The height of this cap is It's only about three, three and a half feet tall. So it is a little bit taller than the two and a half feet with alternative one. However, it's still at a height where most people can still enjoy the view of the bay. And this is to help obtain accreditation height. And then you can see the two people on the path. They are just average adult sized individuals. This is another section for alternative number two. And in this section, we're looking at a slightly different treatment for the soils. We're looking at what's called deep soil mixing, and that is that slightly browner shaded area in the middle of this image. This is where we will have to remove all of that bay mud squishy material and bring in an engineered fill solution that is structurally stronger to hold up our levee. And then we are also looking at introducing a concrete wall in this scenario, which will just help with that wave action again. So this is just another section, typical section along the levee. Both alternatives are not bound by one ground treatment. We can do multiple types of ground treatment in order to achieve the same goal. But these are just two sections that are showing you two different ground treatment opportunities. And then this is the last section of the night. This is a typical section for alternative number two. And this is interesting because it's right next to the San Carlos airport. And so it is a much wider path. You can see at the very top is about our 10 foot path. And then it slopes down to another level with a horizontal or flat 10 foot wide area. That is a requirement of the airport, and so they have much more restrictive requirements than we do in other portions of the alignment. And so this is just showing how we're accommodating those other requirements for some of the agencies along the alignments. So staff's recommendation is alternative number two. This alternative provides our core flood protection goals. It has a lighter touch on the environment. There is less opportunities to bring in more heavy equipment to remove additional amounts of materials. and it'll be a little bit quicker to construct because we're not going quite as wide. We are maintaining the FEMA plus one objective. This project alternative is looking at a cost of around $324 million with a Redwood City portion of $200 million. Alternative one was looking at about a $440 million with a Redwood City share of about $290 million. Cost is a factor that we consider, but it's not the only factor, but it's something that you should be aware of as you're providing some policy direction for staff. Financing and funding have been very big topics of communication when we do our community outreach. Right now, we do have a funding gap for construction. We do not have funding secured for a $324 or even a $440 million project. The city is looking for different opportunities to bridge that funding gap. The city has recently retained a financial or municipal advisor and financial consultant. We will be working really closely with that individual just to outline different options to close that funding gap. There will be cost sharing opportunities with the other agencies along our alignment. So the San Carlos Airport, City of Belmont, the City of San Carlos, there are other agencies along their alignment that are participating in our project and they will be sharing the cost. So that's why from a $324 million project, we can come down to a $200 million Redwood City share when we're looking at the cost sharing with the other jurisdictions. We're also looking at different funding opportunities. There are FEMA grants out there, state coastal conservancy grants, and other state and federal programs. Staff will be meeting with our finance and audit committee in November And as part of our work with our financial consultant, we'll be bringing some of those options to the Finance and Audit Subcommittee so we can further identify what that funding and financing strategy will ultimately look like. And tonight we are not asking for direction or approval on any cost-sharing agreements. Looking at some of our next steps, we are here tonight for a direction from council on which alternative to move forward. This allows the city to meet our grant deliverable for a $2 million hazard mitigation grant from FEMA for our design. That grant was only to take the project through 60% design, which we are at right now, and there's many, many ways to design the project and the two options that we have before you are very different they accomplish the same goals but they're very different and so we'd like for that policy direction to come from council on september 10th we'll be having another iteration of our office hours where the community can meet with team members just talk about the project and learn a little bit more on september 11th the team will be presenting to the utilities subcommittee meeting And as I mentioned before, in November, we will be going to our finance and audit subcommittee. Throughout all of this, the design team will continue working on our environmental permitting and agency coordination opportunities. And thank you for your attention. I'll pass it back to the clerk. Thank you.

Tanisha, thank you for the great presentation. We appreciate all the background and work to get us to this point. And with that, before we get into council discussion, I think we need some public comment.

Thank you, Mayor. Okay, we have two in-person speakers. I'll do a last call to the audience for any in-person or comments on Zoom this evening on this topic. We have two folks on Zoom and we will, three folks, and we'll close the speakers list. once we begin public comment. OK. So we'll start with Rona Gundrum, who's joined us in person, followed by Geeta Dev.

Good evening, council and staff. I'm a member of the Transportation Advisory Committee, but my comments this evening are as a 38-year Redwood Shores resident. I hope you were able to read my detailed public comment email. Both alternatives presented this evening will satisfy the project's fundamental flood protection purpose, so the central choice is not whether to protect the community, but how much additional investment, public space, trail capacity, amenities, and construction complexity we should pursue while balancing long-term resilience, environmental sensitivity, neighborhood impacts, affordability, maintenance, privacy, and future adaptability. Instead of a 20 feet everywhere versus 10 feet everywhere approach, perhaps a hybrid site-specific approach to better balance community-wide flood protection and impacts on businesses, infrastructure, and quality of life of homeowners immediately adjacent to the levee would make sense. A uniform 20-foot wide design could create unnecessary impacts. Conversely, there may be locations where additional width would provide real benefits. In short, protect the entire community to the same high standard, but do not assume that every segment needs to look or function exactly the same. I propose selecting Alternative 2 as the starting point to secure the $2 million FEMA grant and ask the team to evaluate a third context-sensitive hybrid alternative. From a current and future homeowner perspective, it would seem the most useful approach is to evaluate the alternatives against a clear set of long-term priorities rather than focusing solely on today's price tag. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next speaker is Gita Dev, and then we'll move to our Zoom speakers.

I apologize. I didn't want to come, but I thought if I do this on Zoom, I need to be here, so I apologize for this. Okay, good evening, mayor and council members. My name is Geeta Dev. I'm speaking on behalf of the Loma Prieta chapter of the Sierra Club. I would also like to add some context for why we are commenting today. We participated in BCDC's advisory committee during the development of the Regional Shoreline Adaptation Plan, the RSAP. And since then, I have continued to serve on BCDC's Implementation Committee, which is following how cities and counties are moving forward with this critical sea level rise plan. So sea level rise is ongoing and it's a challenge and we'll need a variety of adaptive pathways because conditions change over time. For that reason, we actually believe alternative one deserves serious consideration because it appears to keep more future options open. And maintaining flexibility is particularly important because the city has not yet begun its sub-regional RSAP plan. And we can anticipate robust regulatory review for those who have not seen how these projects progress through the regulatory agencies. If additional protection is ultimately needed, the sort of wall-type structures we've seen in Alternative 2 could potentially be added. So it's very similar to Rhoda's idea that we may need a hybrid. But once we commit to a more restrictive approach like in Option 2, Alternative 2, it will be very difficult to preserve other options in the future. So we also urge the city to take a...

Thank you. Thank you, Kida. We'll now turn to our Zoom speakers. We'll start with Chris, who will be followed by Colin, user two. You can unmute yourself and begin your comments.

Good evening, council members and other participants. My name is Chris McIntosh. I'm with the San Mateo County Bird Alliance, and I'd like to add to the discussion of these two alternatives in the excellent presentation that we'd hoped to see some clear discussion of how nature-based adaptations would be included in the project. This is listed as one of the project goals. Nature-based solutions and also amenities such as viewing platforms will enable residents to benefit from wildlife viewing as they walk or bike along the levee. Alternative one clearly seems to allow for more adaptation options over the coming decades, and it allows for more natural solutions. And alternative two, as has been mentioned, seems to leave little or no room to maneuver for the future. And even though alternative two seems cheaper right now, the main reason not to select it is that it may box the city in in a way that could be more expensive in future. We expect that using nature-based solutions as much as possible paired with the flood control in alternative one would present no regrets, better long-term adaptation solution. And the Bird Alliance looks forward to working with you on developing amenities to help the residents enjoy the wildlife safely. SAFELY FOR BOTH HUMANS AND BIRDS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS CALL IN USER TWO.

Our next speaker is Laura Aiden. Welcome.

Okay, thank you very much for all the work you've done. This is Laura Aiden. I've been a resident for over 40 years here in Redwood Shores. The levee is beautiful and it's very natural and you can see all the birds and the wildlife and many people come not only from the shores but Redwood City and many cities in the Bay Area to just walk and enjoy nature. And I think it'd be nicer to keep it as possible as natural. And so I'm looking at the options and I don't like really either one. But I think the less intrusive one would be number two. The wall there really bothers me, just having a wall, because I don't know if people have been over to Foster City, but it is not very pretty, and there's some advantages, but it's really, it's not conducive with being natural, having a big wall there. I mean, it's at like three and a half feet or something. So I just hope that the city... and figure out what to do for the flood insurance, you know, for all those people. But just keep it as natural as possible and not have amenities in front so you see those instead of seeing nature. Thank you very much. I know it's a hard decision. Thank you.

Thank you, Laura. And that wraps up public comment on this item. Mayor, thank you.

Thank you, city clerk. And as a reminder, public comment is only for those making comment on subjects within the subject matter jurisdiction of the city. So with that, we will move this to the city council for discussion. Who has, oh, we'll start off with the vice mayor.

I just have some clarifying questions. So Tanisha, thank you so much for such a thorough presentation. So in 2010, we built a levee that was permitted by all the agencies as protecting from sea level rise. Is that right?

In 2010, we built a levy that was high enough for FEMA accreditation.

And then in 2020, FEMA de-accredited the levy. Is that right?

FEMA's requirements for accreditation changed, and so the height of the existing levy no longer met those requirements.

Now this option two that we have now, it was presented to us in February and at that time it was 30% designed, is that right?

No. So in February, we were at 30% design. That is correct. But the options that were presented were looking at the elevation or the height of the levy. And so we presented two different options in February. One was the FEMA plus one, and the other was the FEMA plus 3.5. Tonight, we're presenting options for the width of the levy. And alternative one is a 20-foot wide section versus a 10 to 12-foot wide section for alternative two.

So what concerns me about option two, and several of the public commenters have mentioned it as well, it seems to... In contrast to what we were presented in February, there seemed to be fewer options to expand it later. It looks like we are foregoing some of the ground improvements that would allow this adaptation to changed conditions. there are fewer options tonight to expand it later than there were in February. Is that right?

The alternatives that we have for tonight are further along in design, and both alternatives can be expanded or raised in the future, just in different ways. One alternative is looking at basically removing all of that bay mud and replanting. BUILDING UP THAT HEIGHT WITH ENGINEERED MATERIALS AND THE OTHER ONE IS LOOKING AT JUST ADDING A WALL UNDER THE GROUND, A SHEET PILE WALL TO ADD IN THAT STRUCTURAL STABILITY. IT'S DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE SHARED IN FEBRUARY AS THAT WAS JUST LOOKING AT THE ELEVATION.

IN FEBRUARY WE WERE TOLD THAT ground improvements could be allowed if we build higher, but now those grand improvements can't be allowed. Is that right? That's the difference between February and now?

No. In February, we were looking at what elevation or what year of accreditation protection are we looking at, 2060 versus 2100. And the 2060 option was FEMA plus one. And so that's how we got to this FEMA plus one. That's our policy guide that the team is looking at for both alternatives that you're looking at tonight. Tonight, we're looking at, now that we know how high the levee is going to be built to, what's another way that we're going to enjoy it? How wide is it going to be? Both options can be adapted. Option number one is much wider so that in the future, It is a little more streamlined to build up. It just kind of gets a little bit more narrow. And because you start with such a wide base, you can go up higher. It's a little easier. And option number two, we would have to add in more of that deep soil mixing, perhaps add in additional sheet piles or piers, just other engineered solutions to adapt it. But both options provide adaptability.

The reason that I'm concerned is because sea level rise is going to come whether we want it to or not. And what concerns me is, you know, in hindsight, to have built a levee in 2010 and then to discover 10 years later that it wasn't good enough, it was more expensive than if we had engineered, built something stronger and more robust, even if it had been more expensive. back in 2010 what looked inexpensive in 2010 what wasn't really so and I just don't want us to have regrets that we did that a second time in this very same place so I want us to be really really aware of how we got to where we are right now this isn't the first levee we're building and I believe that, well, let me ask you another question. I believe you said that you are beginning outreach, the permitting agencies, BCDC, Army Corps of Engineers, California Quality Control Board. What happens, you're beginning the outreach, what happens if they come back and they say, look, you know, Millbrae and Burlingame are doing three and a half feet. San Carlos Airport wants to do two feet. Why are you only doing one foot other than cost? We want you to do more. What happens then?

So there is a distinction between we want you to do more and we require you to do more. We will fulfill the requirements to obtain the permitting from those agencies. And if that means coming back to council and saying that we need to go higher, then that's a discussion that we're going to have to have. OUR DESIGN HAS BEEN BASED OFF OF THE CURRENT STANDARDS FROM THOSE AGENCIES, AND SO WE'RE GOING INTO THOSE MORE IN-DEPTH CONVERSATIONS ARMED WITH THE KNOWLEDGE THAT WE'VE BUILT IT TO HOW WE INTERPRET THEIR STANDARDS TO BE, AND THAT'S HOW WE'VE PRESENTED IT TO THE COUNCIL.

IF WE CHOOSE ALTERNATIVE ONE TONIGHT, DO WE STILL SECURE THAT $2 MILLION FUNDING? We secure it regardless of which alternative we choose. Is that right?

We've already been awarded the Hazard Mitigation Grant, the $2 million grant from FEMA. The grant is based on its reimbursement basis. So if the city chooses an alternative tonight, staff can submit our final deliverable and we secure the requirements for that grant. If the city does not identify which alternative to submit to FEMA, we are not in compliance with the grant requirements, and that could make our funding that we have already received subject to reimbursement.

So, I'm really, I'm just concerned that we don't have the permits yet. We're at the very beginning of talking with these permitting agencies. And we know one of your slides talk about acting regionally and that the water doesn't stop in Redwood City and that even though it's in one part of Redwood City that we're doing this levy, it's going to affect all of Redwood City and then all the jurisdictions around it. And so looking at that regional viewpoint, it concerns me that... other jurisdictions are building to a higher standard or planning, that their plans, their aspirations are to build at a higher now. And so it concerns me. I feel like we're being driven too much by cost. And we've seen an example where people doing something Incompletely and and being concerned about Scott cost cost us more later because here we are so I'm I'm concerned that if the regulatory agencies look at what the other jurisdictions are saying they're planning for, and it's more than, you know, it's three and a half feet instead of one foot, combined with our history of already building a levy that wasn't sufficient, I'm concerned that we're not going to get the permitting and that then we're going to be back here with more time having passed. And so I just wanted to share that with my colleagues. I'll leave it there for now. But I like the idea of a hybrid. I think, let me just check one more thing. And I really am concerned about... I'll just leave it with one more thing. I've already said this, but I really am concerned that we are too constrained, we're too boxed in with alternative two, that we're foregoing some environmental options because of cost And both alternatives are really expensive. We don't have money for either alternative. And I feel like we're making too many concessions to cost and boxing ourselves in too soon. Those are some of my thoughts. I may talk more later, but those are some of my questions.

Thank you. Mayor, if I may, I just want to reframe one thing that you did say. In 2010, we didn't build a levy that was substandard. We built a levy that met the current day's requirements. Requirements changed over the years. and that's why we find ourselves in this situation. As climate change is continuing, we anticipate that those requirements are going to continue to evolve. So yes, we will likely be here in a decade, a couple decades, but that's not a reflection of the standard that the current product was built to in that existing environment. I just wanted to reframe that.

No, thank you. And you're absolutely right. And thank you, Tanisha. I was a little cavalier with my words. So thank you. You're right. It was done. You know, sea level rose nine inches in the last 50 years. And it's going to start rising faster, plus ground level rise. I'll leave it there.

Thank you, Vice Mayor, for getting us started. We'll go to Council Member Chu next.

I just had some clarifying questions. So this is a new area to me, so forgive me if these are sort of ignorant. So with taking the premise that the goal of the wall is to avoid flooding, what are FEMA's assumptions with respect to events? Are the standards for every 1,000 year, every 500? You know what I'm saying? What are their assumptions when setting the standard? I'm not, it wasn't meant to be a gotcha. It was more like trying, so I think where I'm going with that, so if it's anticipated that these standards are going to change fairly consistently because climate change is accelerating and there is sea level rise. How long do we want this levee to be good for? And is there any way to model that so that we build it for however long that is irrespective of what FEMA does? Do you know what I mean?

Yeah, so there's two different options. One is to design to current FEMA requirements, which is what we're doing with that FEMA Plus One. We could take it in a different direction, but we would need policy direction for that to design it to an even higher standard. And we did present a FEMA Plus 3.5 in February, and we did receive our direction for FEMA Plus One.

Okay.

If the council chooses to give different direction, we can definitely pivot. It'll just add time to the process, but we can pivot.

Sure. And then just from my own understanding, what is the height difference between the previous FEMA standard and this standard? Would that buy us 10 years, do you think? I mean, what is the plug, you know?

Yeah, that's a great question. So we have raised about four feet in 10 years. And what's interesting about the existing levee, it's built on bay mud, which is really squishy. So you put pressure on it, water's going to start seeping out and things are going to settle. We've settled four feet in those 10, actually 16 years at this point.

So if we hadn't have settled, would it still be compliant?

If we hadn't settled and lowered, we would likely be okay.

Okay. Thank you. That's very helpful. Okay. And then if you had to, and I'm not going to hold you to this because you can't tell the future, but if you had to ballpark it, a FEMA plus one, about how long do you think that's going to be good for?

We're estimating that to get us to the year 2060 for FEMA accreditation.

Great. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Member Chu. Who else has any questions or comments for staff?

Thank you, Mayor. Tanisha, thank you and the team for all the great work. I have a little different history than some of my colleagues here, and it wasn't 10 years after we completed the levy project. It was a matter of a couple years. But when we did raise the levy, it was to comply with FEMA requirements at that time. period, it was not that we didn't do a good job. We complied with FEMA requirements at the time of construction. And within a couple years after, FEMA changed its requirements. And that's why they recognized that. They admitted they changed the requirements. And that's why we are in seclusion for the River Shores levy. That is the reason. No other reason is because we did meet FEMA requirements. It was certified to meet FEMA requirements at that moment, but then FEMA changed the rules. And they recognized the investment, they recognized the expense, and they left the river shores in seclusion. So that's the history there. Otherwise, I don't believe anybody should change that history. Just to back up a little bit, this is part of a master plan, as you showed earlier. And so I happen to represent another board and transit agency that we are doing FEMA Plus One. And it is because of cost and time. And when you do these mega infrastructure projects, if you just figure out 3% per year escalation, You figure out $300 million at 3%, every year it's $9 million compounded in cost increase. So it's not just about time and money together, but you add the seclusion component to it, FEMA could change its mind tomorrow and remove seclusion from the Redwood Shores. There's no time bound on that. They can change their mind at any time. And that's why it was intentional that the council members from district one two and three are on the climate action committee because all three districts are subject to sea level rise district two is already in the flood zone the properties in district two the businesses are already paying for flood insurance When we did the Bayfront Canal, that was a city initiative. It was not a friendly acres initiative or a mobile home park initiative. It was a city initiative to help moderate the flooding in District 3, which is the contemporary name for friendly acres and the mobile home parks. So it's really, really important that we look at it on a bigger perspective. that at a minimum, it's not just meeting FEMA, but I think from a cost and time standpoint, FEMA plus one is the right answer to 2060. And the way I look at what has been done at 60%, both solutions, and you can tell me I'm wrong, allow for future height increases. They're just going to be different solutions. But it does not preclude going to FEMA plus 3.5 or FEMA plus 10 or whatever the magic number may be in 2060 or 2080. So am I correct that both solutions allow the levies to be raised in the future?

Yes, both solutions allow the levies to be raised in the future, just different mechanisms for each one.

And the other part is this is just not a Redwood Shores project, and I agree with our city manager. I mean, I think it's lost when you say there's 30-something pump stations, but we collectively, San Carlos, Belmont, Redwood City, West Bay Sanitation, have made a multi-hundred-million-dollar investment to pump sewage all the way to the end of Redwood Shores. And so if we don't maintain and protect that infrastructure, I challenge the other cities and the other five districts, take care of your own sewage. And it's probably not a pragmatic solution because it's now a force main versus a gravity main. And based on what I know from colleagues on that board, there's several hundred million dollars more investment needed to continue to meet changing regulatory requirements. And so there's going to be more infrastructure requirements at the Silicon Valley clean water plant out there. I really want to thank you for all the outreach and more outreach that will continue to occur. I ride the levees every weekend or every weeknight I can. That's my exercise. That's how I deal with some of the stresses of the day. It is not the same all the way around. There are some parts that are asphalt. There are some that are dirt. There are some that are maybe closer to 8 feet wide and others that are closer to 12 feet wide. So it really is a combination of a lot of different things. But the bottom line is the levees need to be raised. And what you've shown are different solutions from different places. There are homes on the south side of Redwood Shores that... Right now, you can look right into their backyard, into the living room, and when we raise it, it'll be easier to look in their property. So there's got to be sensitivity to privacy on the south side. Other parts, I think, behind Indian Creek Apartments are probably the narrowest section back there. And I remember back after we raised the levy the first time when we removed the asphalt in many sections, some of the homeowners complained about that. But that also gives us the flexibility to raise the levees without having to tear out asphalt. So when I look at all of this and what's going forward, the Redwood Shores Levee is part of a master plan. And we have seen that. the master plan, at least from Belmont all the way through Menlo Park. And we've seen that here at council and the price tag associated with that. We have chosen FEMA plus one. And like I said, the other board I sit on, we're protecting a $1.5 billion asset. We are going to go with FEMA plus one also because anything different than that takes too much time and costs too much money. Seclusion can change at any time, so time is important. We all, not just the residents and the businesses, but the city owns property out there, we would be all affected. Silicon Valley Clean Water would all be affected if we had to pay flood insurance, which would show up in increased rates. Both solutions provide flexibility for increasing in the future. I'm very, very cognizant of the local city match or local agency match because we are going to have significant financial pressures, whether it be this project, 101-84, potential increase in PERS liability, reduced if not eliminated VLF funding. There's a lot more financial pressures on us in the future. And most importantly, option two doesn't require any more land. We can deal with the existing footprint for the most part. So my leaning is to option two as the base. I suspect as time marches on, we're going to have to value engineer some amenities. So I would look at amenities as an alternative bid item. And given the permitting agencies like BCDC, they'll probably want some amenities because parts of this are part of the Bay Trail, which requires public access. Some of the residential communities even have to provide public parking to get to the Bay Trail and their communities and maintain it. So I think when you take a look at everything, I think option two is the base with alternate bid items for amenities, hybrid elements, whatever, is my recommendation to my colleagues. I would be reluctant to change the design at this point because I think you politely said if we do not meet the deadline or if we change our minds, we run afoul of our grant requirements. And we don't have the $2 million to give back to FEMA. We need to keep moving forward to meet the grant requirements. And given the complexity of the world we live in, and particularly the administration, they'd probably like to have us give back the $2 million if we don't meet the grant requirements. So I think we need to keep moving forward, continue the outreach. Head for option two with some of the parameters I just mentioned. And let's keep this project moving as quickly as possible.

Thank you, Council Member Gee. And we'll go to Vice Mayor Aiken.

Just really quickly, one comment I want to make. Thank you, Mr. Gee. There's just one comment I want to make on the financing and the funding. And everyone's point is right. Money doesn't grow on trees. I just, you know, Redwood City has 20 miles of bay shoreline. It's the most of any city in the county. And a new... type of funding that's very, very new, but it's going to be ever present, it's going to be ubiquitous in five years, four years, two years, is going to extremely benefit Redwood City because of the 20 miles of shoreline that we have. And that's mitigation banks. Because in a place like Burlingame, where the Hilton Hotel or the Marriott Hotel, you know, it's just a wall and then the water, or maybe a trail. And If they ever wanted to remodel that Marriott, they would have unmitigatable impacts with their CEQA documents, and they could buy mitigation credits by funding a horizontal levy on some of the 20 miles of bay shore that Redwood City has. So it's going to become possible in the future that we could get some of these environmental things that are best practices in the environment done for us for free. And so I want us to not be... I just want us to be cognizant of that because we're planning, and I'll have more comments later, but just because you talked about financing, Mr. Gee, I wanted to throw that into the mix because it's an amazing asset that we have.

Thank you, Vice Mayor. Council Member Howard.

Thank you. Thank you for the excellent report. It really was very good. And I appreciate the detail that you have put into it. I did want to say, first of all, I really appreciate the history that was brought up by Councilmember Gee regarding Redwood Shores. And I didn't want to miss this moment to say we've got to capture this history. We can't afford to go down a road where we forget what we did before, whether it be 10 years or several years, but it's important, important information. So I'm wondering how possibly your department or wherever it would be appropriate, we can capture what was said this evening so we can carry it forward. We need to learn from the past so we don't repeat problems and make mistakes in the future. And this was a good example. It's just we're losing that history as we go forward and less people remember what happened in the past. So I'm hoping that I could put this in your capable hands that somehow we capture what was said tonight so we can use it and have our baseline as we make decisions going forward. And thank you again to Councilmember Gee because I do remember, but not as vividly as you do. And so I really appreciate that you reminded us how this began. And our cooperative efforts with FEMA actually led to us getting a special dispensation, or whatever you want to call it. But we're grateful for it. And I think that's important to make sure we keep sight of that. It mentions, thank you for mentioning all the cost sharing that will be going on with our key stakeholders. I wanted to know though, there are so many. And the Bayfront Canal, we know what we went through trying to get cooperation from just a handful of key stakeholders, and one actually didn't really step up to the plate at the end of the day. So I'm wondering, how has your outreach been to these stakeholders? Do you feel pretty confident that going forward they see the urgency and they see the necessity participating in the cost sharing?

Yes, so we've been meeting with what we call our Technical Advisory Committee, and they are professionals from One Shoreline, City of San Carlos, Belmont, Silicon Valley Clean Water, the airport, Sam Chan's bus yard, WE MEET WITH THEM QUARTERLY TO TALK ABOUT THE PROJECT, TO GO OVER THE STATUS, AND WE ALSO TALK ABOUT THE COST SHARING RESPONSIBILITIES. WE ARE CURRENTLY SETTING UP A DEDICATED MEETING WITH OUR TAC TO GO OVER WHAT THAT COST SHARING PERCENTAGE IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL AGENCY. SO WE'RE, I DON'T WANT TO SAY We are pretty sure that the cost sharing aspect is not going to be a hurdle.

Well, that's very optimistic, and I'm really happy to hear you say that, and I hope that they're listening. But I understand our finance and audit committee will be working with you on this and bringing the stakeholders together, and if there's more we can do, you please let us know, because it's going to be important that everybody has some skin in the game to make this work. And boy, when I saw the list, I'm glad for the list, but I'm also worried about the list because that's a lot more people we have to convince this is the right thing to do. I did want to ask a question about option one, option two. Option one, the 20-foot wide and plus additional for shoulder or anything in addition. My concern is I've walked the levee, and I know that there are large expanses of area where if you did that, you'd almost have to do a taking of people's backyards in some areas because it's that close. And if you were to do that with, I would think that would cost a lot more money. And I don't know if that's really represented in this cost, that if you had to do that, offer money to a homeowner in return for additional. I'm concerned about that. And is that one of the things that was taken into consideration when you decided on option two, alternative two? Excuse me.

Yes, property taking is a very long and very touchy process. We're going through that on our 84-101 project right now. We never want to bring the eminent domain into the conversation. There are areas along the alternative number one, which would require some property acquisition. From what we've studied, they do not include areas of residential homes. It's mostly in more commercial areas. Not that those property takes are less important, but the sensitivity around some of our residents, we really wanted to study that. MAKING THE LEBBY WIDER DOES MEAN ACQUISITION AND THE FULL COST OF THE ACQUISITION IS NOT INCLUDED IN THAT $440 MILLION. WE WISH. IT'S NOT INCLUDED IN THAT ESTIMATE.

I really appreciate you adding that on because that could be a significant cost. It's also a very emotional thing for people to deal with that. And so I'm leaning towards alternative too because if we wanted to widen in some areas, hybrid was suggested, that would be far easier if you can pick and choose where you would do the widening rather than having a forced 20 foot and then you have to make allowances and possibly get into an extremely higher cost to accomplish what we want to accomplish. If we really want to do this right, we can make changes, but tonight I know you've got a deadline. We've got to choose something. So right now I'm leaning towards alternative two with the possibility of possibly adding amenities or adding some within the future. But to ensure that we get the money and get it in on time, I would support alternative two. And thank you again for a very good report and your staff.

Thank you, Council Member Howard. Do we have any other questions or comments? Council Member Strickland.

Thank you, Mayor. Thank you so much, Danisha. I really appreciate all your hard work on this. I do have a couple of questions and comments as well. So I'll just begin with, let's see. Based on the conversation I've heard here tonight, I just want to clarify. Does that 40% remaining design accommodate for what Council Member Howard just suggested? changing the width maybe in some places where appropriate, but not to change the type, the fundamental type of the levee, right? The deep soil mixing versus the sheet metal.

Correct. So if we were to move forward tonight with one of the options, complete our FEMA deliverable, and then we go back and look at some hybrid options, we can take the base point that we start from tonight and then add on to that. Keep in mind that the estimates, they're going to increase as we get further along on our process. But by adding an additional width, if you were to start from alternative two, it would add a little bit additional cost, but it is definitely something that can be considered. It's something that we can use with the additional width to add in more amenities, more placemaking, more marsh areas, So there are a thousand different options out there.

Thank you so much. I appreciate that flexibility of alternative two. This is what I would actually call a Redwood City levy, not just the Redwood Shores levy, right, to the city manager's points, Council Member Gee's points, and those amenities that we currently have there and that we could add to are for everyone, regardless of where you live in Redwood City or neighboring jurisdictions. So I very much appreciate the intention behind that.

Okay.

And I know it's been mentioned a couple times that we have a deadline, but as is in the staff report, just for clarity, our deadline is literally this Friday to submit this, right? Okay, so that definitely creates a sense of urgency for me. Okay. But I appreciate that alternative to is, you know, slightly quicker to build, like you mentioned, and would require less fill, less, you know, equipment, less impact on residents for a shorter amount of time. That's another thing we haven't really discussed is all the construction noise and the vibrations and and disruption to wildlife and all that that will happen with this project, regardless of which alternative we choose tonight. So I'm really glad to hear that that alternative to, you know, lessens the blow a little bit. And I wanted to ask, is it possible to maybe highlight as you already have, any additional insights from the Public Outreach and Results Summary. I know City Manager had shared the links with me and I think Councilor Padilla, I think you have the printout. But in case anybody on Council didn't get the chance to read that memo from Civic Edge Consulting,

Yes, so Civic Edge Consulting is part of our team with Schaff and Wheeler. They're doing an incredible job with some of our outreach. From the survey, we looked at areas for natural character, enhancing the views, maintaining our ABILITY TO INTERACT WITH WILDLIFE. WE ALSO WANTED TO DO PRACTICAL AMENITIES THAT INCREASED COMFORT. FLOOD PROTECTION WAS HUGE. ACCESS AND CONNECTIVITY, IMPROVING THE BAY TRAIL, IMPROVING BIKE AREAS, WAYFINDING. And then they were also looking at areas for benches, seating, lighting, shade, and rest areas. So our server results are part of the project website, and it does include the raw data there. So if anyone would like to do a deep dive, you're more than welcome to.

Thank you so much for summarizing that for my colleagues and I. Thank you. I'll just pause there. I mean, I'm leaning towards alternative two as well, but I'll pause there. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Member Sorkin. We'll go to Council Member Padilla.

Perfect. I'll pick up on the community outreach. I do have a printout, so I'm going to reference it in case. So I think this is important. I appreciate all of our discussion about... Is this a Redwood Shores issue? Is it a city issue? So then something that I'm fond of no matter where it's happening in our city is community outreach. So first thing I say, okay, I want to look. I heard people telling me, oh, there was only one presentation. So I look and I want to see the meeting. So I look and I see that we've had hybrid community meetings. We've had in-person. I appreciate the office hours. But what I see in the notes is that It looks like even though we want to say that this is an issue that benefits all of us, right now, from what I'm seeing, the only people that are weighing in on it are the people who live in Redwood Shores. At least, you know, 95% in-person community, 95% from zip code 94065. So I know you're saying that Civic Edge is doing a great job, but I'm going to challenge them to do better. Because Redwood Shores, and then I think I read something in the staff report that the age of attendees is like 50 and over. So I know the demographics of the Shores, and I don't think it's represented in this community outreach, nor is... anyone outside of 94065 and this is going to be a high ticket item that clearly everyone's going to have to pay for so i don't want us to make big decisions and then everyone else has to foot the bill and they never were even asked I looked at our mailer. So we sent out a mailer, but we spent the money, but we only sent it to people in Redwood Shores. So I just want to make sure that from here on out, if we're going to say it's for Redwood City, let's ask everyone in our entire city. That's really important. And then I'll go on to some of my thoughts. So cost sharing, that's going to be really important. I saw the names, Caltrans, Samtrans, City of San Carlos, Belmont. And I heard you referencing San Carlos Airport, but I just want everyone to know that the San Mateo County owns the airport. So when you say you're meeting with a representative, you're meeting with a county representative in your group?

We have county representatives and representatives from that side of the airport.

Fantastic. So as well as just all Redwood City residents, to Council Member Howard's point, it's a big thing, and we all have to be involved in it. When I was looking at the different alternatives, I know that everyone's saying we do have the option to build on both of them. But just if you look at surface area, you're starting with more surface area. And I think to your point earlier, it would make it easier when we know that FEMA regulations are constantly changing. it's not only about the investments we make now, but how long will those, how much will those updates cost? The adding of the piles that alternative two does requires, whereas if we had more surface area to start with an alternative one. So to Council Member Eakin's point, you know, we don't want to always be consumed on what's the lowest bid, what's the smallest number, because we think we've learned historically that that has cost us 10 times over in certain situations. I mean, I'm loosely using numbers, but... that should never be the only factor. I'm gonna copy some of my notes. I also think we need to be having more focus and talk on groundwater rise and the impacts of that. I just think that with that, I would like us to have more information with just, and also where are we in talking with, Foster City and Palo Alto, just to see how other groups and checking in with those communities as well, I think would be a nice thing for us to have because Foster City has already been down this path. So I would like, and they've faced some hurdles and obstacles themselves. So I think it would be nice to connect with those communities. I JUST THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT BACK TO THE GROUNDWATER, YOU KNOW, THAT WE HAVE UTILITIES AND FOUNDATIONS TO BUILDINGS THAT WILL BE COMPLETELY VULNERABLE BECAUSE OF GROUNDWATER SATURATION. SO JUST FOCUS ON THAT WHEN WE'RE DOING THIS. AND MORE THAN ANYTHING, YEAH, I JUST REALLY WANT A MORE ROBUST COMMUNITY OUTREACH. I would also like to see more maybe involvement with our schools and the youth and even maybe some partnerships with the port and sometimes like the Marine Science Institute. I know they're very knowledgeable. They're doing their own building of some sort of sea level while there. I just think that the more people we can bring into this, the better. Thank you. Actually, though, but with that, I will say that there are some things that I will admit are very, attractive to me about alternative one because I do I like have maintaining optionality I think both of these plans are going to be expensive and we know that there will be updates along the way so I do feel like even though one may appear more expensive now it may not be in the long run thank you please vice mayor

I just have another clarifying question. And thank you for all my colleagues. But I'm trying to get back to this one thing that I'm just trying to understand. you know, alternative one, alternative two. Alternative one is more nature-based. Alternative two is more engineered, more, you know, steel-based. But it's the ground improvements. So if we have four feet of subsidence as we did with the levee in 2010, Can we have, so can we use the ground improvements after that? Like the soil, the improvements described in alternative one, which are kind of nature-based and trying to do nature-y things. Are we locking ourselves in? If we do get four feet of subsidence, with option two, can we, after that happens, say in five years after it's built or something, can we go back and do some of the ground improvements that are described really well in option one?

YES. SO THE DEEP SOIL MIXING IS LOOKING AT REMOVING BETWEEN 15 AND 20 FEET OF MATERIAL. AND THAT'S TAKING ALL THAT BAY MUD OUT AND ADDING IN AN ENGINEERED MATERIAL WHICH IS MORE STRUCTURALLY SOUND. OPTION NUMBER ONE, has the deep soil mixing as its ground treatment throughout the alignment. Option number two has pockets where we're using a smaller section of the deep soil mixing and then more areas where we're using that sheet pile wall. We can always go back and do that deep soil mixing later on if we need to further raise the levee. Another thing we're looking at right now are value engineering improvements. What can we do to increase our bang for our buck, if you will, but also have a structural section? What other mixtures can we add into the soil to make it stronger so that when we have to adapt it in the future, it's just easier for that team in the future to adapt? We are working through value engineering opportunities. We have to work with our geotechnical engineer and our structural engineer on the team. But I guess the short answer to your question is, yes, we can come back and do more deep soil mixing.

Well, that's a real concern of mine because I want as much Okay, let me, I'm glad to hear that, thank you. Let me ask the question another way. Can you assure us that we would be able, that if we build, I'm not gonna ask you that, if we build alternatives to we would be able to come back and build more of what looks like Alternative 1 later if Alternative 2, which is much more engineered, We have the subsidence. We have the sinking. But again, I'm answering my own question by saying if we need to save that alternative because the engineering doesn't work and we have to use nature-based, isn't it more expensive? Why not just do it nature-based to begin with? I'm just asking that question for my colleagues to think about. And then just one more thing is I heard, and I can't remember where I heard it, and I could be wrong, but to Councilmember Padilla's point about let's ask how did it go in Foster City or Palo Alto or what have you, I think that I heard because Foster City, it's a wall, it's a very hard surface that water bangs up against and then it ricochets off and then it goes maybe into other jurisdictions because it's a hard surface and so some other jurisdictions are like, hey, that wall is just shooting your flooding into our jurisdiction. And that's, again, one of the benefits of these nature-based horizontal levees and more dirt-based kind of gradual gradations in the water. Have you heard of that? Have you heard of other jurisdictions saying that that wall in Foster City is just shunting extra water into our jurisdiction? We wish it were a softer landing there.

I have not personally heard that, but I can check in with some of our colleagues over on the design team. We have the same design team that did the Foster City levy, and so they've got some really good lessons learned that they're incorporating into our design in Redwood City. But I personally have not heard that, but I can look into it.

I know that in Marin and San Rafael, which has half the number of residents that we do and twice the budget, they have a $400 million a year budget and 40,000 people. But anyway, back to my point, they're... Their planning for sea level rise incorporates a lot of nature-based solutions and a lot of horizontal levees, and I would ask you to look. I think they've already done their BCDC plan, and it incorporates a lot of nature-based solutions, I'm told. And so I would ask you to check in with them and look at the design team that they use. I think it's out of New York. And very nature-based. And I'll stop there. It's just, so we can do a hybrid. I heard you say we can do a hybrid. Is that right?

Yes. If that's the direction of the council, we can submit one alternative to satisfy FEMA, which I'm sorry, I'm really pushing for at least something to give to FEMA. And then as we're advancing this design, we can go into a hybrid option.

Thank you, Vice Mayor. We'll go to Council Member Chu.

So thank you so much for answering a lot of questions and for a terrific presentation. So as I understand it, this wall has three purposes, to prevent our homes from flooding and our businesses from flooding, to bring us into compliance with FEMA regulations, and then will that impact the ability of individuals to obtain insurance? WILL BUILDING THIS WALL NOT JUST PREVENT THE HOMES FROM FLOODING IN REAL LIFE BUT ALSO ENABLE PEOPLE TO OBTAIN MORE FAVORABLE RATES ON THEIR HOME OWNER'S INSURANCE?

AS LONG AS WE HAVE A LEVY THAT IS ACCREDITED, HOMEOWNERS ARE NOT REQUIRED TO DO FLOOD INSURANCE. I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE OTHER PROPERTY INSURANCE.

SO IT WILL PREVENT THE NECESSITY OF A COSTLY INSURANCE PURCHASE.

Yes, as long as we are not in the flood zone, they are not required to have flood insurance.

From a practical perspective, I would absolutely prioritize just keeping the water out of districts one, two, and three, and above all, protecting our sewage and sanitation. I think that's just the really practical thing we're trying to accomplish here. At the same time, I acknowledge several things. Number one, this is effectively a linear park. I lived on such a parka. When I lived in Japan, I lived on this canal And it went on for miles and it was it was about 10 feet wide and it was lined with cherry trees and had little benches and things like that. But a really good linear park can be an incredible amenity. And so I certainly acknowledge that, you know, that this is a linear park to many people. If we have two options, you know, one that's effectively 200 million, one that's 290. I WOULD MUCH RATHER SPEND THAT EXTRA $90 MILLION CONNECTING THAT LINEAR PARK TO THE REST OF THE CITY THAN MAKING IT WIDER. I THINK AS ONE RESIDENT SUGGESTED, YOU KNOW, GETTING THE 10-FOOT OPTION DONE EXCELLENTLY AND THEN HAVING THE OPTION TO DO AREAS KIND OF LITTLE BUMP OUTS ESSENTIALLY WHERE IT'S WIDER. little vignettes, things like that in areas where it makes sense, I think allows us to accomplish the goals of the wall and still have a wonderful linear park. To Council Member Padilla's point about community outreach, I think a big part of convincing the city that this isn't just a Redwood Shores levy, it's for all of us. is really ensuring that there is connectivity, that there are ways to get to this linear park without having to get in a car, park somewhere. I'll be honest, I'm always trying to figure out, is there any way I can bike to it? And there's really not. I mean, you could, but it's not something you'd want to do. um so that connectivity i think would really help uh advance the idea that this isn't just for one district it's for all of us um and it then it could be an amenity we could all access um trying to think if there's anything else uh just to council member g's comment about uh um asphalt if there's a way to do asphalt free options that I think might be cheaper and nicer. I think especially with the rise of e-bikes, it's also sort of natural traffic calming. It's a lot harder to ride a bike fast on compacted granite or something like that than it is on asphalt, and it's also more pleasant to fall on compacted granite than it is on asphalt. I've tried that out myself. SO I THINK WITH THAT I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF OPTION TWO WITH AS WE GO ALONG, YOU KNOW, IF WE CAN FIND OPPORTUNITIES TO DO BUMP OUTS AND ENHANCEMENTS WHERE IT MAKES SENSE. AND REALLY EMPHASIZING CONNECTIVITY FOR CAR FREE MODES. THAT WILL ALSO KEEP TRAFFIC OUT OF THE COMMUNITY. THERE WERE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO EXPRESSED WE DON'T WANT PEOPLE DRIVING HERE TO DRIVE. hang out on our levee, and if you can make it accessible outside of a car, that obviates the need for parking. Thank you so much.

Thank you, Council Member Chu. Not seeing anyone else's mics on, I will add my thanks to Nisha, and a couple of quick questions to hopefully clarify. I know folks have brought up FEMA's height requirements kind of changing over time. And I'm sorry if I missed this in one of your earlier responses, but do we have a sense of when FEMA might be coming back to us with an update on their height requirement?

I do not know at this time.

Yeah, of course. That's how it goes. Thanks, Tanisha. Aside from that, you had also mentioned that both of these options give us the ability to add height to it in the future, right? So if we did hear from other neighboring jurisdictions that they're going above and beyond FEMA plus one, we would still have that ability and capacity to make change. I was just kind of curious, what would be the, the cost and time sort of savings of going with like an option two over an option one if we did have to build an extra height to it. Is there any sort of cost benefits to that too?

So option number one is adding a little over $100 million to the price tag for construction. That doesn't include any property acquisition. If we do need to increase in height over time, those estimates would be variable. I couldn't even put a number on it because as we march forward in time, the economy, everything's just inflation.

Definitely, thank you. And I heard a couple of my colleagues mention just what if there are other jurisdictions who are coming up with different standards than what we have in mind. So I was just curious. I know we... were intentional about FEMA plus one, because we saw our friends in Foster City and I think that was sort of matching the height that they had too. But how do we compare to other cities who are, or other jurisdictions who are still moving in the process and kind of playing catch up to? Where are they in the process and just how do we compare to them?

Yeah, I'd say the other jurisdictions are more in the planning stages. So our project is probably a little bit further along in our design phase. All of the jurisdictions are required to meet the minimum requirements for permitting, just like we are. And should they choose to go above that, I mean, there are trade-offs for that. And once they come out of planning stage, we'll know exactly what direction they're trying to go rather than what they aspire to. And so it's... Okay.

Yeah, thank you, Tanisha. And that all helps. And it was a really great presentation. And I know there's been so much community outreach. I had a chance to go to the February... February meeting you'll organize. I know there are a few more recently leading up to this. And I think, you know, It's been mentioned that we had focused so much of our outreach on the immediate River Shores area, and I do think we're getting to the point where it's time to start thinking about reaching out to other folks. So definitely have some appetite to have outreach to our other neighbors, especially as we're starting to go through the cost-sharing process and coming up with what that formula will look like with all of our neighboring jurisdictions. But I... I'm also thinking about that part. I sit on the Silicon Valley Clean Water Board and you know, excuse me, let me take my mask off. I sit on the Silicon Valley Clean Water Board and there are a handful of jurisdictions who are represented on that agency. And so coming up with how we divvy up the cost to any project is a fun time. And so I guess I just, I think of that experience and I think of, you know, Since we're the first ones, or the city that is the furthest advanced in the design process, I feel like that's an opportunity for us to set the tone. And also, I think we're gonna be the ones who have to go to the other cities to say, hey, this is what we have in mind. please come to the table, right? How do we be partners on this? How do we share the cost, right? That's going to support your community and protect your community just the same. So with that in mind, I feel like alternative two helps us accomplish that. And I like the idea of having a hybrid sort of model in our back pocket as the number two. I do think there are pockets where this project could be really helpful for placemaking. And somebody said, maybe it was during the presentation, that this should be something that attracts folks to Redwood Shores and that is an amenity to the Redwood Shores community, right? So I want folks to feel proud of having something like this in their backyard, right? And I also think about what is gonna protect the community more than 4,000 homes who are at risk right now. And I think staff had calculated over a billion dollars in property that's gonna be protected by this project. So thinking about that and what's gonna be the quickest and fastest way to get us there. And I have to say, alternative to the design of alternative to looks really great. And it's not a pure functional engineering solution to a nature problem, right? I know we have friends from the Foster City project who are now consultants on our team and are working with the working group. So we get that shared experience and learned lessons too. So that's all to say, I feel like alternative to staff's recommendation is the right path. And if there are opportunities for us to create more placemaking with that hybrid approach, creating more spaces for the community to gather, or making it just, yeah, I think Dinesh you know where I'm going with this, but just being thoughtful about how we approach that, because I don't think it needs to be completely uniform all the way around the levee, so I will leave it there. Again, appreciate all the support here, Tanisha, from you and your team. And there are no other lights on.

We'll go to Council Member Sturgeon and then Council Member G. Thank you. Sorry, just a couple rapid-fire questions based on the discussion. So, okay, so looking at an alternative, there's the very short wall up to 3.5 feet, right, you were saying, Tanisha, but it's covered in concrete. It's enclosed. You don't see the sheet metal. And that was a concern that we heard from some residents, namely about the Foster City levy. So just kind of debunking that you cannot see the sheet metal. Okay, great. Golden. And then groundwater. So both of these versions, alternatives, prevent groundwater seepage, right? I mean, to the extent possible. Okay.

We have a very high groundwater table in Redwood Shores. If you just dig a two-foot trench, you will start getting infiltration. Both options are engineered to address the impacts of groundwater.

And does one do it better than the other, or are they just comparable?

They're just different methods.

Yeah. Okay. Okay. And then Council Member Chiu suggested an asphalt-free cap, and for a variety of reasons, right? But I wanted to check, that doesn't have any ADA implications, does it?

It does not. There are some maintenance concerns. We have a lot of burrowing squirrels, and having that cap there does help deter, if you will. But a lot of residents do really enjoy that natural feel, particularly those who are riding bikes. It is a lot nicer to fall on dirt than asphalt. And also, if there's someone walking their pet, the asphalt does tend to get a little hotter.

Recognizing there's maintenance impacts very supportive of the idea of a more natural cap based on the community feedback we received that you mentioned from the memo as well as the Councilmember G said about giving us that flexibility to continue building it higher if we need to at a lesser cost because we want to remove asphalt And then I just want to clarify a question that the mayor asked so So I know we can't know for sure, but the cost of increasing the height of alternative one type levy or alternative two type levy, I mean, can you estimate which one costs more to increase? I mean, we're starting with a smaller base. Sorry, I'll go ahead. Go ahead.

I would estimate that alternative two would require a little bit more of an engineering solution to raise. So it would cost a little more. Alternative one does have a much wider base. So as you go up, you could make it narrower. So from that perspective.

And that's what I thought. But we also have to take into consideration, as was mentioned, possible and necessary taking, which is costly. So I wish we had like a... a net cost comparison for these two based on future height increases. But I think we can figure that out as we move forward a little more. I just wish I had that information in front of me, as well as the input from residents outside of Redwood Shores. Well, 20% was from outside Redwood Shores from that, but more than just 20%, right? Thank you.

I am so sorry, and I'm not going to belabor this, or I'm not going to prolong this, but what you said, Mr. Serkin, just gave me a question, and my colleagues as well. Is it possible at some places to have the 20 feet and at some places to have the 10 feet wide? Is it possible? Can the hybrid be... You know, like that?

The hybrid could look at expanding up to 20 feet where we're going to have minimal property acquisition concerns.

Yeah, that's my point, where there's no taking of property.

That's certainly an option for the hybrid. It will increase the cost, though.

Okay, so I'm very supportive of that in concept because it might be cheaper later.

We'll go to Council Member G. Thank you before I lean in with a motion if no one else makes it. I want to thank Council Member Howard and Council Member Sterk. I didn't really want to go there knowing the levy system. I didn't want to use the eminent domain word and taking word. particularly along the side of Redwood Shores that faces the port. It is narrower, and I'm adamantly opposed, particularly to the residential properties, of any taking to get that 20 feet. I just want to make sure I said that on the record. I didn't want to take any commercial properties. There's not a lot of space between the property line on that side of Redwood Shores facing the port. And so... To the extent other places might work for 20 feet, I'm fine with that, but definitely no way can I support taking private property, particularly residential properties, in their backyards. As we move forward with, I've said it before, alternative two, with different parts, maybe 20 feet or different amenities. Just want to make sure that as we develop and mature the design that public works is involved because they get to maintain it. What is not in the surveys is how often are the garbage cans going to be emptied, how many there are. And while there is public works will say, yes, we will, there's a cost to, yes, we will. And as well as the widening of the levy What also didn't show up in the surveys but showed up in the community meetings is this phenomena that we've all talked about here about e-bikes and speeding. And that has happened. I have been on a bicycle where somebody on a bicycle got knocked off their bike by an e-bike. And so that becomes PD and enforcement. But how do you enforce bikes on the levee when you can't even have PD out there? And so those are just different things to look at as the design matures the next 40% to make sure Public Works is involved and PD. or how do you even deal with e-bikes on the levee? And they are out there. I can guarantee that. And those were things that came up in the last community meeting by different residents. So I think there's a built-in tension between privacy, public access, people on bicycles, e-bikes, maintenance, and things like that. In that next 40%, we just need to make sure Public Works and PD are involved to make sure those two issues are addressed somehow. I don't have a good answer, particularly for the e-bike enforcement. So Mayor, if you like, I'll second your motion. I think you made one in your comments about alternative two with some hybrid opportunities for other amenities, maybe even 20 feet in some sections, but also balance that with the other departments that are required to maintain and look at what that cost may be as well as PD for enforcement of e-bikes and other speeding things. Did I come close? That was great. Perfect.

So that was a motion and a second for alternative two with hybrid opportunities there. Not seeing anyone else's lights on. Could we get an electronic vote, please?

Start with Council Member Chiu. Yes. Council Member Gee.

Yes.

Council Member Howard. Yes. Council Member Padilla. Yes. Council Member Sterkin. Yes. Vice Mayor Aiken. No. Mayor Martinez-Abaez.

Yes.

Motion passes with six votes. Vice Mayor Aiken is opposed. Thank you.

We'll thank everybody for the discussion on item 8A. We'll now move on to item 9, our study sessions, beginning with 9A, study session on activities to advance the City Council's strategic priority of children and youth. And we have our Assistant City Manager, Derek Wolfgram, who will introduce the item prior to turning it over to our Interim Library Director, Sarah LaTora, and Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Director, Tara Warner, for the presentation. Welcome, everyone.

Thank you very much, Mayor. Good evening to you, Vice Mayor and Council Members. Derek Wolfgram, Assistant City Manager. I'm delighted to have the opportunity to introduce this item tonight as initiatives to support children and youth in our community have been one of the most critical and one of the most fun things I've gotten to work on the entire time I've worked in Redwood City. So as the Mayor mentioned tonight, our Interim Library Director, Sarah LaTorra, and our Parks Recreation Community Services Director, Tiara Warner, will present some updates on children and youth in Redwood City and our services for them. But this council priority really touches almost every city department. We have a number of youth engagement programs that happen in our public safety departments and police and fire. Our public works department does some wonderful environmental sustainability education initiatives. ENGINEERING AND TRANSPORTATION, KEEP OUR CHILDREN SAFE THROUGH THE DESIGN OF OUR PEDESTRIAN, BICYCLE AND TRAFFIC INFRASTRUCTURE, AND FINANCE HELPS FIGURE OUT HOW TO PAY FOR IT ALL. I COULD GO ON, BUT I'M INTENDING TO KEEP THIS INTRODUCTION PRETTY SHORT. I do want to give a shout out to, you get not only Sarah and Tiara, but we have a wonderful showing of the Parks Recreation Community Services youth and teen staff who've stuck it out through the meeting so far. So it's great to have the whole team here. So yeah, it's been about three years since we last did this study session. presented by Chris Beth and myself at that time and a lot of great work has happened since then. One of the things that came up in a discussion earlier today is that with the council's three main strategic priorities of housing, transportation, and children and youth, there are a lot of housing and transportation items that come to the council for action. With the children and youth, it's less so, and so there's less opportunity for you all to be informed about the work that's happening in that area. And so I'm really glad that we have an opportunity to share some of it with you tonight. I do encourage everyone who's in attendance or everyone who's watching to check out the very detailed staff report and the attachment to the staff report. With the time we have tonight, we'll only be able to scratch the surface of all of the amazing initiatives and programs and services that we offer youth in the community. but here to highlight some of the key data, the impacts that we're having, and the trends that are impacting our work, I'd like to invite Sarah and Tiara to come to the podium. Thank you.

Thank you, Derek. Sarah LaTora, Interim Library Director. And let's see, looks like we're already up. Perfect. Can we go to the next slide? So this is just an overview of what we're presenting tonight, which includes questions for city council consideration, a map of city services, key demographics and numbers, current trends that are guiding our work, impact stories, and then we'll end with a Q&A session. Next slide. The two questions for council consideration are, does the city council have any questions regarding the current programs and services provided by the city and its partners for children and youth? And are there additional or alternative programs and services that the city should consider prioritizing within the existing resources? Next slide. Good evening.

Tierra Warner, Director of Parks, Recreation, and Community Services. Thanks to our awesome GIS team, we were able to get this map produced that highlights where our programs exist. So in the green, you'll see our parks. In the pink, you'll see where our libraries are located. Blue are the community centers that serve the main youth and children programs. And then in yellow, I think that's coming up as yellow, is where our REACH after-school program sites are located.

Next slide. In Redwood City, there are roughly 17,500 people under the age of 18. 46.5% of these youth are Hispanic or Latino, 26.9% are white, 12.6 are Asian, 8.5% are two or more races, about 3.2 are black, 1.6 are American Indian, and 0.7% are Native Hawaiian and or Pacific Islander. Next slide. This slide gives a high level view at the ethnicity of students in Redwood City. The numbers on the Sequoia Union High School District encompass schools outside of Redwood City. And as noted in the report, students from Redwood City attend schools throughout the high school district. So we felt it was important to include that information here. REDWOOD CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT HAS THE LARGEST PERCENTAGE OF HISPANIC STUDENTS COMPARED WITH THE REDWOOD SHORE SCHOOLS, WHICH THOSE ARE TWO SCHOOLS WITHIN THE BELMONT REDWOOD SHORE SCHOOL DISTRICT. AND WE DID HAVE SPECIFIC NUMBERS JUST FOR THE TWO SCHOOLS. SO THAT'S WHERE THE 900 STUDENTS COMES FROM. AND THAT IS MORE HEAVILY ASIAN COMPARED WITH REDWOOD CITY AS A WHOLE. AND THEN THE SACOYA UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT MOST CLOSELY MATCHES THE DEMOGRAPHICS OF THE CITY AS A WHOLE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

ONE OF THE COOLEST THINGS ABOUT MY JOB IS AFTER ALL THE HARD WORK BEHIND THE SCENES, PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING IS TO SEE OUR PROGRAMS IN ACTION. THIS SLIDE IS A VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE ENGAGED IN OUR YOUTH AND CHILDREN-LED PROGRAM. 23,000 youth came to Parks and Rec programs last fiscal year. We served over 7,000 kids, or youth athletes, shall I say, on our fields. Thank you, Mike. We served also a great number of kids in our summer camp programs. We have over 90 contract instructors that help us decide what programs we're going to offer during the summer, and so we've been able to serve over 5,000 youth participants in our summer camps. AND THEN TO THE LIBRARY WITH ALL THE AWESOME BOOKS THAT WE LOVE. THERE HAVE BEEN OVER 450,000 LIBRARY MATERIALS DEDICATED TO CHILDREN AND YOUTH THAT HAVE BEEN CHECKED OUT. AND THEN ATTENDANCE, OVER 65,000 IN ATTENDANCE FOR PROGRAMS FOR CHILDREN AND YOUTH. AND THEN OVER 7,000 PARTICIPANTS IN THE LIBRARY SUMMER LEARNING CHALLENGE.

Next slide please. These are the funding sources that are helping to provide these programs for the city. As you can see the majority of the money comes from the general fund and then we have additional funding that comes from a variety of grants and then also our community non-profits that support both the parks and the libraries. So all this together helps us to do the amazing service. And I would say our staff are pretty nimble at trying to go after additional funds to continue to expand programs and services for the community. Next slide, please.

And then we really love to talk about the why. Why does this work better? Why do we do it? What does it do for the folks that are participating in our programs? There's scientific-based research that backs that. A substantive, robust offering of programs for youth leads to improved school readiness and literacy. It supports the academic success beyond the classroom, promotes physical health. We should help strengthen mental and health and resilience, and we know that's huge. We help reduce risk factors for youth involvement in the justice system. We also help prepare youth for the future and careers in economic mobility. We also develop civic leadership and community engagement through our YAB and TAB programs and beyond. We also help increase equitable access to opportunities and then support working families. And if I wasn't born and raised in Redwood City, I was born and raised in San Diego, but I am a walking representation of how important youth programs are. Day camps, after school programs, all those things help people be awesome contributors to the community. So we're excited to be able to offer these programs.

There's quite a few different things that impact our work and we looked at these four key trends and how there are both opportunities and challenges that come along with these trends. So the four trends are third grade reading level, mental health resilience, economic mobility, emerging adulthood, e-bikes, e-mobility. And so I'll cover the first two and then tap on my partner here for the second two. So some significant achievement gaps persist. While 47% of Redwood City School District third graders met or exceeded ELA standards, proficiency varies sharply by race, income, disability status, and English learner status. Students facing additional barriers experience largest gaps. Proficiency falls to 31% among low-income students, 16% among students with disabilities, and just 9% among English learners. LIBRARY AND CITY PROGRAMS INCLUDING PROJECT READ, SUMMER LEARNING CHALLENGE, BRAIN FUSE AND EARLY LITERACY INITIATIVES EXTEND LEARNING BEYOND THE CLASSROOM AND PROVIDE TARGETED SUPPORT. WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONTINUE STRENGTHENING PARTNERSHIPS WITH THE CITY, SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS TO IMPROVE LITERACY OUTCOMES AND REDUCE DISPARITIES. YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH CONCERNS ARE INCREASING. Diagnosed anxiety and depression among youth have risen substantially alongside growing concerns about loneliness and social isolation. Connection is a critical protective barrier. Supportive relationships, trusted adults, peer connections, and strong sense of belonging help build resilience and promote healthy development. Technology presents both opportunities and risks. Digital platforms can support learning and connection, but excessive use, cyberbullying, social comparison, and disrupted sleep can negatively affect well-being. The city has opportunities to expand safe, inclusive spaces and programs that promote social-emotional skills, healthy coping, responsible technology use, recreation, and meaningful community connection. The city can address some of these concerns through the ways we provide programming.

And I know everyone's excited to talk about e-bikes, but I'm going to start with economic mobility first. The transition to adulthood is taking longer. Young adults are reaching milestones such as financial independence, leaving home, marriage, and parenthood later than previous generations. Local economic conditions amplify these challenges. High housing costs, longer educational pathways, and changing workforce expectations can delay independence for young adults in San Mateo County and beyond. EMERGING ADULTHOOD IS AN IMPORTANT PERIOD FOR INVESTMENT. YOUNG PEOPLE NEED SUPPORT NAVIGATING EDUCATION, CAREER EXPLORATION, FINANCES, HOUSING, RELATIONSHIPS, AND MENTAL WELL-BEING. THE CITY HAS OPPORTUNITIES TO STRENGTHEN WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT, FINANCIAL LITERACY, CAREER EXPLORATION, LEADERSHIP, MENTORSHIP, AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT PROGRAMS THAT CREATE PATHWAYS TO LONG-TERM ECONOMIC MOBILITY. E-BIKE USAGE. is rapidly expanding among youth. E-bikes and other e-mobility devices provide convenient transportation and recreation, but introduce increased safety considerations due to higher speeds. Youth safety remains a priority. Inexperience, excessive speed, limited traffic awareness, inconsistent helmet use, and unsafe interactions with pedestrians and vehicles are key risk factors. EDUCATION AND PREVENTION ARE CENTRAL TO THE CITY'S APPROACH. POLICE, PARKS, AND RECREATION AND LIBRARY PROGRAMS ARE COMBINING EDUCATION, OUTREACH, ENFORCEMENT, AND HANDS-ON SAFETY TRAINING AS MEASURES. We have more opportunities to build a community-wide culture of responsible writing by expanding education for youth, parents, and schools, while supporting safe, active transportation and shared public spaces. I want to give a special shout out to the Safe Routes to School program. We have Ivana, who works with our engineering transportation program to work with a task force that provides collaboration on measures to get kids to school safely. So thank you, Ivana, for all of your work. In addition, engineering and transportation have helped provide 15 mile an hour zones around our schools for broader safety efforts. Additionally, staff are waiting on state legislation to help guide where we go next with e-bike rules and regulations.

And I just want to add that the e-bike discussion is not ending tonight. We will dive more deeply into e-bike legislation at a future council meeting. So tonight it's more around programs that we can utilize to help strengthen our communities. Next slide, please. All right, some quick impact stories before we dive into questions. So these are a few stories I thought would be great to share with you. Library is a refuge. A customer shared that the library was a refuge for her family when they first arrived in the community. Seeing children reading, using computers, and accessing books, including Spanish language materials, moved her deeply. Today, her children are university students, and she credits the library with watering the seeds of knowledge. A parent shared how the teen center helped her homeschooled autistic son come out of his shell by connecting with peers and participating in activities he enjoys. She praised staff for creating such a welcoming and supportive space. And finally, a teen living in shelter shared how meaningful it was to see a Christmas tree in the teen center. Without a home of their own to decorate, the simple gesture gave them a chance to experience the joy and spirit of the holiday. And many other holidays are celebrated in the teen space as well. Next slide, please.

I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO ABOUT 20 MIDDLE SCHOOLERS A FEW WEEKS AGO. AND I SAID, IF I WERE THE ONLY PERSON TASKED WITH BRINGING A MESSAGE TO ALL OF THE ADULTS IN THE WORLD, I COULD BE THE ONLY ONE TO TAKE YOUR MESSAGE TO ADULTS, WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE ME TAKE TO THEM? AND A COUPLE OF THINGS CAME UP. THEY SAID, ONE, WE DON'T GET WHAT IT MEANS TO THAT IT ALWAYS HAPPENED THAT WAY, OR I DID IT, OR BACK IN MY DAY. WE DON'T UNDERSTAND IT. WE DON'T RELATE. The other thing was like we can't use the excuse of walking 10 miles in the snow and barefoot. We can't use that excuse anymore. It's not working. The next piece was they felt like they're being watched more than any other generation. They felt like if they make a mistake that could be on the internet at any moment in time and they have no control over that. THE OTHER PIECE WAS AS MUCH AS SOME PEOPLE ABUSE HAVING PHONES IN THE CLASSROOM, THEY REALLY DO APPRECIATE HAVING A PHONE CLOSE TO THEM JUST IN CASE THEY NEED TO MAKE A PHONE CALL IN AN EMERGENCY. AND SO WITH ALL THAT SAID, WE'RE COMMITTED TO PROVIDING PROGRAMS THAT ARE FOR THE KIDS IN THIS GENERATION WITH THE INFLUENCE OF THE KID THAT LIVES INSIDE OF US. AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO DO THAT. Next slide. All right, so we're here at questions. Does the City Council have any questions regarding the current programs and services provided by the City and its partners for children and youth? And are there additional or alternative programs and services that the City should consider prioritizing within existing resources?

Are we going to public comment first?

Okay.

Thank you both for that great presentation, and we'll take public comment before bringing it back to the City Council.

Thank you, Mayor. I don't have any speaker cards at this time, so last call to the audience or on Zoom to be recognized for public comment on the study session item this evening. I'll give it a few moments. Seeing none, Mayor, that concludes public comment.

Thank you, City Clerk. And again, thank you to our wonderful presenters this evening. I think, Tara, what you mentioned, just serving the youth of today's generation with the experience of the inner kid is just exactly what I think we want to be hearing from the people leading our parks and libraries. So it was amazing to hear. But I'll bring it back to our council colleagues here for any questions or comments. Who would like to get us started?

Council Member Gee. Thank you, Mayor. Thank you. This is great. And I think part of the secret sauce goes to all the councils who have been very clear with our strategic priorities. That clarity, I think, helps over the many years of what you need to do as department leads, as well as our donors and everyone. That clarity just helps everyone. amplify what you do and hopefully attracts new donations, funders, grantors, and things like that. So thank you for the great work. I was curious, you know, we do a lot with our city budget, but as I think I mentioned in the previous comment, it's going to be heavily stressed going forward. Is there a split between, what's the split between city, federal, state, and philanthropy in terms of you know, at the high level funding. Do you know that, what that might be right now?

We're not on. Can we go back to the slide about the budget?

It is. Yeah.

Thank you.

Do you want to take it or do you want to go for it?

SO THIS SORT OF CAPTURES ONE YEAR OF WHAT HAPPENS, AND BUDGETING THAT WE GET FROM FEDERAL STREAMS OF FUNDING, STATE STREAMS OF FUNDING, EVEN LOCAL GRANTS, VARIES FROM YEAR TO YEAR. FOR EXAMPLE, THE LIBRARY RECEIVES ANNUAL FUNDING FROM THE CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY PASSED THROUGH FROM THE STATE BUDGET FOR PROJECT READ. SO THAT'S MATCHING FUNDING FOR POSITIONS WE FUND MATCH THOSE. SO THAT'S ONE THAT IS RELATIVELY RELIABLE, BUT IT IS DEPENDENT ON THE STATE BUDGET. AND THEN THERE'S ADDITIONAL FUNDING THIS PAST YEAR, SUCH AS THE PD GRANT THAT IS NOT A REGULAR ANNUAL-BASED FUNDING. THAT VARIES IF THERE'S DIFFERENT OPPORTUNITIES. I WOULD SAY THE FUNDING THAT THE LIBRARY IN PARTICULAR IS RECEIVING FROM OUR NONPROFITS CONTINUES TO BE STEADY, ALTHOUGH THE NONPROFITS ARE having challenges with fundraising, it is harder for them to raise money. So for example, our Friends of the Library, overall they give money to the library, last year it was about $106,000, this year the Friends of the Library only can do $101,000, so that means we need to make choices on how are we gonna reduce what we're asking for. So I think this is similar to what parks are experiencing as well.

Yes, and in addition, our REACH after school program is funded by the ACES and ELOP grants, which have been pretty steady for us as well.

It'd be great to be able to kind of see the trend lines over years, to see what's stable, what's increasing, what's decreasing, just so that as council members we know where to, to the extent we can apply any pressure or help or be supportive or buy more tickets or whatever. And to disaggregate the top one about city general fund versus PRCS ticket sales. I think splitting that out might be also another dimension of helpfulness.

Well, Picnic en Blanc is an annual fundraiser for Parks and Rec programs, so I encourage you to come if you're looking for tickets to buy.

So that 66.9% can go to 80% if we go to Oktoberfest? Yes.

If enough people go. And also, you should mark your calendars. There's an upscale pub crawl coming up that supports the Library Foundation. That's in October. So we hope folks will join us for that as well.

But again, I think we can control general fund more directly and then we can celebrate and advertise ticket sales. So I think having those taken apart a little bit is helpful. The other comment I'd like to make, I want to thank Tara, you and Derek for recognizing our commitment to infrastructure too. And when you add that into the numbers, I think it probably will double it. you know, with safe pathways and safe routes to schools, the 15 mile per hour zone, all the different things we have done and continue to do, crossing guards, you add all that in here, We're not doing it just to do it. We're doing it to make our community safer for our young people. And that needs to be celebrated and acknowledged also. Along with my community who doesn't know how to drive 15 mile per hour past the Redwood Shores Elementary School. They don't know what to do. I think PD's gotten a lot of calls on the non-emergency line, but what do I do? But we need to recognize and celebrate, because of that clarity the council's provided, our strategic priorities, we continuously invest in making sure our community is safe for our young people. So it'd be nice to be able to quantify that and put that in here, too, because some of that is one-time expense, some of that is future, but some of that is annual recurring expenses, too, or investment. So great, great report. Thank you for all the hard work, and thank all the other departments that have a piece of this, too.

Thank you for getting us started, Councilmember. Who would like to go next? Council Member Howard.

Thank you. Great report. And your enthusiasm always gets me always feeling good. I really appreciate it. And I'll try to get to both of those activities because they are a lot of fun. They really are. Put it out that you need volunteers, too. Make a plug for it.

We need volunteers. Yeah. I think the sign-ups are live for the Octoberfest.

Okay, great. I do have, I wanted to, I feel right now one of the biggest problems that we have, I know e-bikes are a problem, we've got a lot of problems, but the one I'm most concerned about right now is young people and the mental health issues that don't sometimes get expressed or talked about. Loneliness, you're talking about, I mean, with COVID, what happened with the isolation, people in their homes, and I think it left scars that are going to take years to unravel. We don't even know probably the extent of how this is going to shape the young people who live through that. But I bet they're living with I don't know, bad thoughts or sad thoughts, and how can we do a better job with that? We're offering so many wonderful things, but you could go to a program and have a great time, but you still haven't dealt with the issue that's in your head. Do we have those kinds of partnerships, especially with the county who they deal with this a lot? And I'm wondering, do we have those kinds of partnerships and plans to address it more fully for the future?

Sure. First of all, I want to give a shout out to our youth and teens program staff. They have a youth center that's very popular, and these staff do a really great job of connecting with the kids that come in on a variety of bases, interacting them, engaging with them, making sure the homework is done, but also making sure they have a safe place to be. I am working with a local nonprofit that has a van that comes to different spaces to offer those mental health opportunities for youth. Oh, the library has it also. So that's a partnership that I'm currently working on so that we have that option for youth to have someone to chat with and get some valuable resources.

I just want to add about our spaces. I think part of the challenge is trying to make sure teens are aware they exist because it is such a valuable space for youth. We have caring, supportive adults. And as somebody who was a teen librarian myself when I started my career here, we've really built a culture where when youth express issues that are occurring, we connect with the schools and let those schools know about like, hey, this child needs you to check in on them because Maybe there's some issues at the home or there's issues around cutting or suicide. So we are very proactive about seeking out resources to support the families. We also work closely with PD and might ask for a wellness check if we feel that there's a need. While we are not a after school program and like a required reporter of these issues, we do take them seriously and try to make sure the students have the supports they need. There have been incidences where we've also worked with One Life Counseling and other resources in the community. I can't remember. I'm blanking. There was one group we used to work with which now is not available. But we are still seeking out ways that we can connect kids with more mental health resources. One area of this that I really want to highlight is our youth community. let us know after the pandemic that they wanted quiet spaces, not just the noisy rambunctious teen centers and youth centers. And so we actually converted one of our spaces into a quiet teen space so that students that want to be able to come to read, to talk quietly, to work within small groups, to just be in a place that's restful and relaxing, have that opportunity. So we do really try to take what the students are telling us and put it into action.

No, I appreciate that. But I know you mentioned that you'll bring it to the attention of the schools sometimes when you're aware of a problem. I did volunteer at Sequoia as a mentor for some high-risk students and the teachers said we're just overwhelmed so if we give that information to them I'm worried what do they do with it because I think everyone's a little overwhelmed and not sure how to deal with some of these problems so I was wondering do we have connection or plan to maybe collaborate more closely with the county because I feel there they may have the resources that can address some of these problems. Any thoughts on that?

I'm sure it's definitely something we can look into how a partnership might work to address those issues.

I know the county offered the council a to go on tours of their resources and where they're located, and they're going to have a North County tour and a South County tour. I already signed up for the South County. I encourage my colleagues to please sign up because I want to find out. I don't know much about the locations or the type of services other than what I read, but to see it firsthand, I'm wondering if maybe it'll spring some ideas on how we could work together because just taking a problem to the school I feel like we're overwhelming an already overwhelmed teacher population. And there's got to be a better way. And maybe a parent can't even handle it because they're overwhelmed and don't know how to deal with the child. So it's got to be more of a collaboration to deal with this precious resource we have, which is our kids. I'm hoping we can do it. I'll report back after our tour with the county, but have you done this before, or do you think it's something we could explore further?

Yeah, there's quite a few different county groups that we work with now, which I think we can continue to build on those partnerships. We work with the Pride Center. There's a new emerging partnership, which I'm not certain if this is the one Tiara is talking about or not, which is with Edgewood. They have a new mobile van that they're starting up, And so our staff are going tomorrow, I think, to go tour their facility in Redwood City, but also to see the van, and then we're gonna start discussing what would it look like if they came and parked in front of the library once a month, or depending on how much bandwidth they have, to be able to start that. This is a new initiative that the county is launching, so I'm sure there's many other groups that we can use throughout the county and utilize their services, but we've had a lot of success working with the various county agencies, so I look forward to hearing additional ones you suggest we should reach out to.

I do want to give a shout out to our HR department. We did have an incident recently with one of our youth in the youth center and we reached out to HR and they provided someone to come out to chat with the kids and staff as a debrief.

That's great. That's very helpful. And the other thing is I wanted to just lastly say we have two plus two plus two, well, we have relationships with the schools and we meet or are supposed to meet frequently enough that we can discuss each other's issues and how we can work better together. And the one I find that's just not very successful is the one with the Redwood City Elementary School District and the Sequoia High School District. We haven't met, I don't think, once this year. Maybe we met in January.

THANK YOU. I BELIEVE WE MET LAST JANUARY.

WE KNOW IT. EVERYONE IS BUSY. I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST MAYBE WE THINK ABOUT DIVIDING IT UP AND SAYING LET'S MEET WITH THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT BECAUSE THEY MIGHT HAVE UNIQUE PROBLEMS AND THEN I think we have to kind of take control of the situation, because if we just let it go on the way it is, it'll be another year before we ever meet with these groups. That's an opportunity to really share resources and problems and solutions. We can't do it alone. They can't do it alone. So that's my suggestion for the council is maybe we stop trying to get everyone into the room and maybe we'll have to make the extra effort and even go to their facility. I'd be willing to do that. Just that's how desperately I think we need to meet with these teachers and educators to know that we want to work together.

I'll just add that we have recently, within the last week, reached out to the new superintendent of RCSD to try to set up a meeting with both myself and the division manager of youth services and outreach. So we are intending to have that meeting very soon. Obviously the school has just started back up, but I will be persistent and make sure we set that up. And the intent is to talk about what sort of supports we can provide to the school as well as to make sure the new superintendent's aware of what are we already doing in the schools and maybe build upon those current processes. We do have great contacts with all of the schools directly through both their principals and their library staff. So we do make an effort to communicate on a regular basis to all of the schools and through them, often the teachers, but definitely it's always worthwhile to continue to strengthen those relationships. I'm lucky enough to have a student at Sequoia High School, so I do have a really good relationship with the current principal, and I actually have a meeting with some counselors tomorrow morning. So I think it is one of those areas that the library would love for it to bring you along, and we can help strengthen these relationships.

That's wonderful to hear. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.

Thank you, Council Member Howard. We'll go to Council Member Strickland.

Thank you, Mayor. Thank you so much, both of you, for your hard work. This is, I know, just like a taste of all the work that goes into our programs. And I really do applaud you for everything that you have shown us here. I know I can't begin to thank you enough for how much work you do. I did want to spend some time just focusing, zeroing in on a couple key issues, areas of improvement that aren't unique to us, of course, but that we do have a part in. One of the areas that struck me the most was youth homelessness and the 507 students experiencing homelessness in RCSD. i read in a council connection that um you know we've temporarily paused enforcement of hopeful horizons ordinance because we don't have shelter space right now because as of august 11th the county reported that there were 179 adults and 55 families on our shelter wait list some of whom are likely rcsd families and students and so that's what i want to focus on how do we get what is in our control to zero. Zero youth homelessness in Reboot City. And I don't have the answer for that right now, obviously, but that's the question I want us to ponder. And then moving on from that, I didn't see Redwood City Together in the mix here, but I do understand in talking with Derek earlier today that this was, of course, a focus on our specific Redwood City programs and initiatives. And while we are a partner of Redwood City Together, a funder even, this is... We're not the sole leader there. But I would like to discuss how we can partner even more with Revit City Together. A couple weeks ago, when Rafa was here earlier, he referenced the... summer intern showcase. And we had, actually, a couple of the students speak. Ms. Rodriguez, for example, who interned with through that summer internship. And it was really amazing to hear from each of them what they've accomplished over the past couple months and the learning experiences they've had and the job opportunities they will now have access to. Like Ms. Rodriguez, she's actually staying on, I think, with Familias Unidas. So I want us to do our part as a council to show up It's the least that we can do to represent together events for the kids to the extent that our schedules allow. And then with the exception of mentioning the Pride Center a moment ago, I was saddened to see no mention of the LGBTQI plus community in this presentation or report. that's not okay. I know it wasn't intentional by any means I'm sure but you know we have the pride center we have outlet outlet in redwood city up woodside road so could you just speak to some of the work that we're doing with the pride center for those who may not know please.

So there's a variety of things we do with the Pride Center, and it's not just during June. It's throughout the year. So we work with them on working with our teens. There are different initiatives they're often doing, so we try to cross-promote their efforts. And I don't think the work just starts and ends with the Pride Center. It's also the philosophy and attitude of the teen space. Part of our libraries are, we're welcoming everyone, and so there is a very intentional, up in the space, you are welcome here, rainbow flags are there. So the space, we are trying to communicate visibly and also through our actions that those spaces are for people of all walks of life. So I'm blanking on specific programs, but I do know we do stuff throughout the year. And then it's also through our collections. That's a really big part of how you help to provide opportunities for youth to explore and think about their own identities. And that's by having those materials that are from a range of perspectives and ethnicities and showing kids like them in books, whether it's picture books, chapter books, books for young adults whatever it is those those representations are really important so that people can see themselves and feel validated and i think it's it is an effort that we do on a regular basis so i'm sorry it's not in the report but absolutely it is a fundamental topic that we care about in our spaces and different programming like the drag story times Those are intended so that you are celebrating and highlighting joy and the different ways that people experience life. I would be happy to come back and share more about what we're doing, but I know time is limited tonight.

Thank you so much. I didn't mean to put you on the spot, but I do appreciate you sharing a little bit about how we are supporting queer and trans youth in Redwood City. What you said about uh having a collection in our libraries that is reflective of the community like that was very um impactful in my childhood you know being able to pick up books that where i saw myself in that book and and felt validated as you said so thank you um all right and then uh i uh to the point about collaborating more with the school district i mean I got Trustee Cecilia Marquez and Trustee Mike Wells on speed dial here. I mean, I was texting with Cecilia earlier asking, hey, what would you like me to bring up? So leverage our personal relationships with our fellow elected officials at the local school districts. And sorry, city attorney, for having my phone out. But so Cecilia had asked, What are we doing to bring back spaces that are weather-protected spaces for teens? Like she mentioned Malibu Grand Prix. I mean, we're not going to get that again, right? But we have been doing that, right, with the parkade, with the mini golf. And those have been excellent. But what resources do you need from us to make that happen more frequently, permanently, and more robust? Because, you know, some of the supplies is a little war-torn, but still fun. I've played it. So, yeah, what resources do you need from us?

I'm sorry, did you say weather-protected?

Yes. So, you know, as an example, the parkade. It's under that big, giant tent at Courthouse Square. Gotcha.

Yeah, Lucas Wilder, our assistant director, is a wizard, and MacGyver is an amazing piece of our team that comes up with brilliant solutions like that. And Indoor Parkade, I don't know of an event like that across the state, and I know a lot of people in Parks and Rec are networking MINE IS IN COMMON WITH PARKS AND REC PROFESSIONALS. SO THERE'S CERTAINLY OPPORTUNITIES FOR US TO LOOK INTO MORE THINGS LIKE THAT IF THE COUNCIL IS INTERESTED IN US PURSUING THOSE. BUT YEAH, THE PARK AID WAS ONE OF THESE BONUS THINGS THAT REALLY WORKS OUT AND KIDS LOVE IT. SO WE CAN DEFINITELY LOOK AT MORE OPTIONS.

VERY INNOVATIVE. FULLY SUPPORT LOOKING INTO THAT FURTHER IF THERE'S MAJORITY SUPPORT FOR THAT. THANK YOU. AND I'LL WRAP UP IN... I'LL JUST PAUSE HERE. I HAVE MORE.

I'LL JUMP IN. THANK YOU. CAN WE GO TO FIGURE ONE, THE MAP OF FACILITIES, PLEASE? CAN WE START THERE? I WANT TO LEAVE THIS OUT BECAUSE I THINK THIS IS A GOOD VISUAL FOR US TO HAVE UP WHILE I MAKE MY COMMENTS. And I make these comments as I am a newer council member, but I was a longstanding commissioner on the parks and recs commission. So I'm going to ask questions. Some, I may already know the answers to, but I'm going to ask them anyways for everyone else's benefit. We know where we see these green spots. We can see where they're concentrated and where they aren't. So I just want everyone to visually take that in. And I want to see that it looks like, if I read correctly, we spent around $8 million, probably about 3.9% of our general fund is for youth and children, I think was on the staff report.

OK.

So I want us to stare at that. And what I'm thinking is, well, what I know is that not only are we park deficient, I want to know who's taking our programs. Where are our programs and who's in them? And something that I was so excited about you know, is when we've developed this technology and Parks and Rec and everyone was getting all this mapping and we're getting closest, how can we really see who we're serving? Because when we see who we're serving, you know what it also tells us? Who we're not serving. And while I appreciate table five in the chart where it shows us, you know, total number of youth age zero to 17 served by PRCS programs, That's not helpful for me, because what I want to see, and I made the request, and if you guys can run the report, and I know that we can, is I want a zip code breakdown. I want more demographics. You guys said we were going to have demographics, but these are all just big numbers. None of this is broken down. This isn't helpful. I mean, it's helpful for telling one story, but it's not really helpful for getting to serve the communities that we need to serve. So I would really appreciate... seeing some metrics and more data about who we're serving with these kids, where they live, where they're coming from. Because I have been saying this for years, we need more programming in different areas of our city. Everything can't be at Redmoor and everything can't be downtown. You look at the list, it's like it's either in Redwood Shores or it's at Redmoor Inn. And it's been like that since I was little, and it can't continue to be like that. So I would like us to really focus on that. And then something that no one is talking about that I think we really need to mention, and this is because of things above us, but childcare. We, you know, there have been things that are passed and we're all very excited that everyone can go to TK now and preschool, but if you see in the numbers, there's a huge gap. From 5 to 12, those school-aged children, who are the ones that we need in programs? We have a need there. So that, we need to have a big focus on that. And what I think is a lot of these kids, you know why they can't be in programs? Because they're taking care of their siblings. They can't be in the soccer camp because they got to get home because mom has to get to work and they have to pick up their brother after school. So I want us to have this data because then we can actually create programs that serve the people that we have been leaving behind. So I would really appreciate having that information and us just looking at more closely we can partner to address the fact that we do now have more children in elementary school at a younger age, and what that has done to our caretakers, our childcare providers. There is an overabundance of space at certain ages, but we have a huge gap at five to 12. um and to speak to some of the mental health things you know what i think these kids kids need their why kids love sports some of them and some of it is cultural we need to invest in their things that they care about and you know what when you start caring about something you care about if you didn't care about school now you do because you don't want to lose football you don't want to lose soccer so if we could do whatever we can to reduce any of the barriers For kids, whether that's the cost of playing the sport, whether they get a uniform or not, the shoes. Let's make it really accessible. When I see the huge amounts of money, and then I see that our children aren't reading. I mean, Derek, I see you're excited, but I have to tell you, I was really sad when I read this. This is... The numbers are terrible. It's below 40% in reading and math. Third grade reading levels, it's not okay. We have to do more in this. I just don't think we have to have more creative programming because just summer reading challenges, and I think the world of Project Read, but it's not enough. And there are certain segments, and if you take a look and you compare the shores, it's more than disheartening. uh... i could see why you didn't want to put those charts up here but i think it's important that we all look at them because we are doing a disservice to our children and we need to make proper investments in strategic investment so i would really like to see how we can help programming how we can better work with the school districts and i will be quite honest And maybe this is my question to the mayor. I would love to be on one of these. I hear everyone talking about we have these school districts two by twos. I think I may be the only person on council with a school-aged child. I go to PTO meetings. I read the news. I know what's going on. I would love to serve. So if there is a way that we can be more involved, I know Council Member Gee spoke earlier about how certain districts are on climate action because they affect you. I want to advocate for our children. So if there's an opportunity for me to be in a group where I could do that, I would welcome it. So I'm happy to talk about that offline as well. But I appreciate everything you all are doing. But we just need more and more focus. the people at the different school districts to get on board too. Thank you.

If I could quickly highlight something brand new that came up with the fundraising from Picnic en Blanc. Every year the foundation gets our feedback on something that they could fundraise for. This year, with feedback from our YAB and our TAB programs, they requested that the fundraiser be dedicated towards providing equipment for someone who wants to play football, paintbrushes for someone who wants to get art. So we're really lucky to have that partnership with the foundation to provide some opportunities for something like that.

Thank you. And it would be also helpful if we could see the breakdown for... Parks and Arts Foundation, if what their scholarships that they divvy out, because it said scholarships versus equipment. So I would like to see how much money is scholarships versus equipment. Sure.

Thank you. Council Member Chu.

So thank you so much, both for the presentation and for all the work you do. You know, something, you know, I always brag about our parks and our libraries, but I feel like every single staff person really cares, and it shows in everything you do. And it's so appreciated. And I think it's every single person on this dais's job. It is the school district's job, and it's all of our jobs. to ensure that our kids have their best shot at a healthy, happy, productive life. And so I understand that there are things outside of your purview that really affect kids. Um, and so I think that this conversation has, has become about, you know, the kids in our community and how can we help them flourish? And I know that intersects with what you do. So I'm going to talk about things that intersect with what you do, but I understand that not directly a responsibility. Um, so the first thing I wanted to go to, I just had a question back to that map where the parks are. Yeah, I see it's in a line. Is there a reason for that? Is there some kind of like geographic feature that makes parks in a line like that?

I don't believe that's the case. There's often parks in neighborhoods, right? That we are part of this overall map that the city maintains. And then there's some other bigger ones such as Red Morton.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS INTENTIONAL. THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING. THAT LOOKS LIKE HETCH HETCHY TO ME. I'VE BEEN LOOKING THROUGH CHAIN LINK TRENTS THINKING THAT SHOULD BE A PARK. IF THAT'S HETCH HETCHY, I THINK WE SHOULD TURN HETCH HETCHY EMPTY LOTS INTO PARKLETS. So that's the first thing. Write that down. Because that's a cheap, easy. She's writing that down. Okay. Yeah, I think that's Hachechi. I think that's what that is. Okay, great. So I was really thinking about, you know, I think about the kids in my community a lot and kind of, you know, Maslow's hierarchy of needs. And I go back to our city's priorities, housing, transportation, and children and youth. It is very hard to override being homeless with a program. it is very hard to override, you know, being unable to get from a to B, you know, if all the programming is down at red Morton and my kids, they're not my children, but the children in my community can't get safely from our community downtown or to red Morton, it may as well not exist for them. Um, and so it is our job to make sure that, you know, we have abundant housing. that we have safe streets and that we really frame those things with respect to children and youth. And by definition, kids, many can't drive. And I know I bring this up a lot. Car crashes have been the leading cause of child death by far without a close second for most of the century. And if you look at the injuries, it's about 30 to one in California. So, you know, it's not just deaths, it's catastrophic injuries. Like if we want our kids to grow up and grow old, dealing with road safety is probably the number one thing we can do. The second most important thing we can do is abundant housing. But that's our job. That's not your responsibility. But I just wanted to echo Councilmember Strachan's comment about no homeless children and I'd love to see no road deaths or serious injuries or even injuries at all. So then, you know, things that kind of fall or are adjacent to your purview is the, I was dismayed by the numbers with respect to literacy, numeracy and literacy. And I know it's hard to educate kids, and I know that when you're dealing with learning differences and language barriers and things like that, it's hard. But there are states like Mississippi that have seen enormous gains, and certainly Mississippi is dealing with much more substantial challenges economically. than a place like Redwood City. And so I would love, you know, I don't know what we can do to support the schools, but I know that I would really love to engage more with the schools, and to Council Member Padilla's point, and to understand what can we do as a council to help the school district succeed in helping our kids learn to read, write, and to succeed academically, because that's gonna have a huge bearing on whether or not they're able to go on to lead happy, healthy, productive lives. So then coming to parks and libraries. So that's kind of near the top of the pyramid of needs. I share Council Member Padilla's view about sports. When I think about what really brings joy, where I see joy, where I see attachment and community, where I see connection in my community, A lot of it is on the soccer field. Like that's kind of their, it's like church, you know, it's like where they meet, it's where they connect, it's where they eat together. And so, you know, I feel like my job is to get my community a soccer field. But I think, you know, the role the parks play in bringing sports to kids and in programming sports is so important. And to Council Member Padilla's point, the more we can distribute that equitably throughout the city, And again, I know a big rate limiting step for that is the, you know, there's no soccer field on my end of town. I guess there's one at Hoover that I take that back. Hoover's packed. We need one kind of further south. So sports programming, I think is super important. I would also add that, how can I articulate this? E-bikes and really e-motorcycles. A bicycle goes 20 miles an hour, has about 250 watts. That kind of vehicle is not a danger. Something that has 750 watts and goes 28 miles an hour is how kids are getting hurt. And that's not really something for us to deal with here, but the ability to ride in little gangs of bicyclists I think would be immensely helpful for kids. If our streets were safe enough, my dream is that our streets are safe enough they can ride downtown in little gangs and it's fine and do their little wheelies and have fun. that's a wholesome, healthy, physically vigorous activity. And I was even thinking, you know, maybe we could have certain weekends where we close the street off and kids can do wheelies all the way downtown. I don't know. So I think even leveraging the space we have in streets to bring joy and physical activity. I think with respect to the programming at the library, I think it's amazing. I mean, I think what you're doing is terrific. Keep it up. I would also be interested in knowing, I noticed that we're helping about two to three times as many kids as actually live in Redwood City. And my first thought was, I wonder if that, I wonder where those kids are coming from. Um, and it'd be really cool if there's a way to find out who we are serving, um, cause we're clearly doing a lot. Um, trying to think if there's anything else. Um, yeah, so I absolutely love the work you do, but I share the wish that, that it was distributed more broadly, uh, with with respect to geography. And maybe that's something we can work on together. We have to provide the facilities, but once they're there, being able to keep them. So thank you for all you do. It's terrific work.

And two things I want to just add and comment on. One is that we absolutely can always use more volunteers with Project Read. We're currently serving about 350 youth of Redwood City School District. And these are all students within our boundaries and North Fair Oaks. BUT THAT'S A LIMITATION IS WE NEED MORE VOLUNTEERS. SO IF MORE FOLKS ARE INTERESTED, WE HAVE REGULAR TRAININGS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR, SO WE WOULD ABSOLUTELY LOVE MORE VOLUNTEERS. AND ALSO SPEAKING TO THAT HIERARCHY OF NEEDS, ONE OF THE THINGS THE LIBRARY DOES TRY TO DO IS WITH OUR PROJECT READ FAMILIES WHO ARE OFTEN FOOD, HAVE FOOD DESERTS OR INSECURITY, WE DO PROVIDE WEEKLY GROCERIES FOR THOSE FAMILIES TO HELP THEM TO BE SUCCESSFUL. AND WHEN YOU ELIMINATE FOOD AS A REASON WHY YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO LEARN, IT DOES ALLOW PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO FOCUS MORE ON THOSE OTHER SKILLS. ANYTHING ELSE YOU'D LIKE TO ADD?

SURE. I HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO SHOUT OUT OUR COMMUNITY CENTER WHO SERVES OUR HUMAN SERVICES DIVISION WHO ALSO PROVIDES RESOURCES FOR FAMILIES WHO ARE IN NEED OF FOOD AND THINGS LIKE DIPERS AS WELL FOR THEIR KIDS. SO I JUST WANT TO GIVE THAT TEAM A BIG SHOUT OUT.

Another thing the library tries to do is outreach events. So that is a way we do try to get out to the community to speak to what Marcella was saying as well, to try to do that. So obviously we would love to have more time and staffing to be able to do that. And we try to meet out at the schools when we're invited to different celebrations as well. So definitely an area that we are focused on and interested in engaging more.

One thought I had, I know that it's hard to build like a new library but I remember one of the biggest most important and I think historic houses in our neighborhood went on sale and I think it might be haunted because it does go on sale like every two years or so. So our chance will come again. But I just remember thinking, you know, this house is incredible and it would make an amazing library and community center. And so, you know, even as we think about ways, like I think we have to start getting creative about things like parks and libraries. You know, a really perfect street is like a linear park, you know. a cool haunted house is a perfect library. And it's a lot cheaper than building one.

And I don't want to discredit what you're saying about libraries in your region in particular, but we do have very close partnerships with the county of San Mateo's library system, which has the North Fair Oaks Library. So we do a lot of work with them, and they're on the same property as the Fair Oaks Community Center. I'm not saying that we shouldn't continue to invest and do more in this space, but we do have partnerships with the existing libraries as well.

Thank you, council member. Go to the vice mayor.

I'll be extremely brief because I took a lot of time on the last item. So just the slide about the grants or the, just want to go there again real quick. My question is just simply how, how many, how much money, and it's okay if you don't know, you can email me later, but how much money does project read get with grants? They get the federal grants, state grants, County grants. What, tell me about project reads grants.

Yeah, so that's two separate things. They get funding from their friends for literacy, and that nonprofit specifically benefits the Project Read program with backpacks, with supplies, with eyeglass exams for students who need it, hearing exams, et cetera. Like if you have a different learning challenge, you can get it.

WHERE IS IT ON THIS?

THAT IS INCLUDED IN THE LIBRARY SUPPORT GROUPS. IN THE REPORT, WE ACTUALLY HAVE MORE SPECIFIC DETAILS ON HOW MUCH DIFFERENT GROUPS ARE GIVING, BUT WE CAN ABSOLUTELY GIVE YOU MORE INFORMATION. SO THERE'S FUNDING FROM THAT LOCAL NONPROFIT, AND THEN A GOOD CHUNK OF THE BUDGET, WHICH IS ACTUALLY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE CURRENT BUDGET THIS YEAR, ARE THOSE TERM-FUNDED POSITIONS. I CAN'T REMEMBER THE NUMBER OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT THOSE TERM-FUNDED POSITIONS ARE FUNDED THROUGH THE CLLS GRANT FROM THE STATE, AND THAT GIVES US DIRECT FUNDING TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE MORE STAFFING TO SUPPORT PROJECT READ. THIS IS NOT JUST FOR YOUTH, THIS IS ALSO FOR ADULT LITERACY. SO THERE'S A FAMILY LITERACY COMPONENT AS WELL AS AN ADULT LITERACY COMPONENT. SO IF YOU'RE INTERESTED, WE CAN GET YOU THE NUMBERS OF HOW MUCH MONEY IS COMING FROM THE STATE FOR THOSE SPECIFIC PROGRAMS. AND THEN THERE ARE MATCHING GRANTS, WHICH IS WHY THE CITY FUNDS PROJECT READ THROUGH OUR GENERAL FUND, AND THEN WE'RE ABLE TO PROVIDE THOSE PROGRAMS.

Yeah, I would just, any information about the funding for Project Read, I would love. And then I'm done, the only other question I have is, could you, you have some wonderful people here who are helping with our youth, could they introduce themselves? Absolutely. Come on up. Thank you for staying so late, and if you could just tell us your name and what you do, that would be fun.

Good evening, Council.

I'm Talisha Brent, Interim Recreation Manager for the Youth and Teen Services. Thanks for having us.

Hi, Council. I'm Mike Smith. I run the Afterschool Sports Program, and I'm working with the field's policies now and running some of those programs.

Hey, Council. How's it going? My name is Eric Betancourt. I'm the Interim Teen Coordinator, and I also help with our Youth Center at Red Morton.

and our awesome spokes program. Don't forget about that.

Good evening. My name is Jody Fernandez, Recreation Supervisor for Parks and Rec. I have the pleasure of serving lots of our kids at our Reach After School programs, our special events, our summer camps, all kinds of great stuff.

Hello, everyone. I'm Ivana Rodriguez. I am the Redwood City Safe Route to School Program Specialist. My role is essentially just getting youth to walk, bike, roll, get to school, provide them with the transportation resources they need in our community. I'm also working very closely with the Transportation Department here every Tuesday, just to make sure that we're updated on any projects going on around schools, that we're updating all of our school admin. We also host a lot of different events, activities, and programs in the community to advocate for bike and pedestrian safety.

Fantastic. Well, thank you all for staying up late with us, and those are my questions.

now speaking of bike gangs in the summer you can catch eric uh... leading about twenty kids on their bikes throughout the city getting to defend that trips but uh... okay i have a few more questions and this actually given that you brought spokes at this i saw spokes i think it's great but i thought are really high absentee rates in schools and i thought here's maybe an opportunity i thought Everything here, I think we need more outreach. I asked several parents if they had heard of these financial literacy programs. No one I had asked had even heard of them. They actually told me they had paid for ones at a local community college for their kids to go to. So one, just how do we get the word out more? Two, could spokes perhaps be focused on some of the kids who maybe are having some issues getting to school? I just don't know. Do you apply to get that? I saw it's a six weeks program, but Maybe we could have referrals to the program or some kids who could use some help if that could be a nice partnership. I would really love to see that. And then with that, just more, I know we do this naturally and I've always seen it at the library in Parks and Rec, but just more youth employment. I see that we have sprinklings. I feel like I find out that Parks and Works has an internship, and then I'll find out that the library has interns. It would be great if we knew of all the youth employment opportunities that we had in the city and then created more. I think the best way, I think that will help with mental health. I mean, kids, I asked this young kid this morning, he said, I want to make my own money to buy my own shoes. He was like, I'll pick up your lead. I mean, they really want to just get things for themselves. There's a real pride in that. So I think anything we could also do. If that's through tutoring or big buddy programs. I mean, even with the schools, I know my daughter had a little buddy and she'd be so excited to pick out the book she's going to read. And I've had little kids come up to me and say, oh, your daughter's my, you know, just any programs where we could get that foster leadership and reading and any kind of stipends that we could create to give to youth and for employment. I would love to see more of that.

Yeah, and our leaders in training program is doing a really good job. I think we're at 50 this summer. So that's more than 50 leaders in training this summer. And that's kind of where we start them at, like getting them the training with a little lower pressure and then hoping that that succession builds them into applying for our rec leader programs and beyond. And sometimes they become city managers. It's really great.

Maybe we need some interns for city council. I mean, I think I'm all for internships and getting people engaged civically. So thank you.

Yeah.

And I love, we would also love more teen volunteers specifically for our Project Read. So in case folks are not aware, we have a wonderful program where teens tutor youth. And this is actually something that shows everybody's literacy level rises because often kids that are neurodiverse, when they're teaching a subject, they gain mastery over that subject. And so it actually improves the literacy rates of both the tutors as well as the students. If anybody knows more volunteers that are interested, I'd love to be able to give them stipends. Unfortunately, I don't have that budget, but if the council is interested, we would be delighted to provide those opportunities.

Thank you, Sarah.

Thank you, Council Member Padilla. We'll go to Council Member G next. Just to wrap up, you know, what I've heard, well, let me back up. Tonight's presentation is focused on what we do as a city, but we can't lift up all youth by ourselves. It's a partnership with the school district, the high school district, community at all, college district, and from what I know, a lot of nonprofit organizations out there. So maybe to our city manager, is there a way to do a memo to us that lists all the different partners out there and what they focus on so that we can help distribute and let people know what's going on? Because it's not just parks. It's just not the library. It's just not the school district. But from what I know, there's a lot of people out there. And if we can get sort of a... resource guide of all the different partners and what the school district's doing. Because I know, for example, River City School District's, I think, partnering with the Gartner Center and maybe Stanford and Belmont River Shores is partnering with some others and there are different non-profits that are providing after school programs or mentoring or counseling or different things. I think having all that in one place rather than in 20 different places and everyone has a little piece might be very helpful. And maybe one of our nonprofits, maybe Rubber Seat, can put it together, or somebody. So I'll leave that with you.

Thank you. Derek will be talking. No, he's got the lens across the organization and elsewhere. So yeah, thank you for that.

Thank you, Council Member Gee. I'm not seeing anyone else's lights on. Thank you for the great presentation and everybody who stayed with us. It's great to see everybody here. I am just so impressed by the incredible work that you all are doing. And it's so comprehensive and it's so holistic. It's not just providing a basketball league and calling that wraps, right? It is just you all are really thinking about new and creative ways to support the generation of today, which is amazing. But I also just have so much appreciation for what so many of my colleagues have mentioned around powering our youth and giving them opportunities for leadership development and doing it at a cost that families can actually afford. Because it's not too long ago that I remember playing club soccer and the cost of that just membership fees, and somebody mentioned jerseys, right? Or going to a weekend tournament, the costs add up so quickly. And I know it's only intensified since I've been out of school, so it's amazing to be able to provide these opportunities for folks. But just to respond to a couple of things that I heard, you know, I'd be very open to revisiting the frequency of our two-by-twos or coming up with a new way of figuring out those meetings. I know our city clerk was trying to get something scheduled in the summertime, and it is tough to organize, what, six of us, right, in our calendars, so... you know, finding a way, a new way to just bring up these issues and hear what's going on. I think that's really valuable. Council Member Padilla, I definitely hear the interest in wanting to serve more and appreciate your interest on Broward City together. That is touching all of these districts, right? So we'll keep that in mind as we go through this. But I also... would be really hungry for some district level analysis too. I think the zip codes would be great. I know my district, we have, we might be one of the younger districts just because of the amount of families that live in D4, right? So I'd be curious to know, get a snapshot of what that looks like for every district, not just my own, but to get a sense of what the needs are and how they change. So that would be really helpful and And some folks mentioned mental health, and that was really clear. There are different ways that that's being provided, but it would be amazing to be able to lock in Edgewood or somebody, a provider of those kind of services, because I think we're only gonna see those really critical services sort of fall to the wayside, right? And that kind of led me, you know, connected with somebody from the Redwood City Ed Foundation who's working with our community schools serving Redwood City and North Fair Oaks. And they were alerting me that, you know, their mental health resources are potentially gonna be cut by HSA at the county. So definitely coming up with a map and sort of a collective game plan of how do we provide these services that are gonna be falling off is gonna be really important. And just prioritizing the resources that we are offering too. And then aside from that, I am also thinking about, because the competition for grants is gonna be so much more intense, and it will be a much more difficult environment, I think, for nonprofits to be surviving and thriving in. I would also be interested in hearing from staff, what are some ways that you all are seeing ways that we can streamline these services and supports to the nonprofits. Like, I know working in the nonprofit space, some contracts are based on just reimbursements, right? And that could be very helpful if it's a very large nonprofit, but if it's a small nonprofit providing really acute services, that might not actually work out, and they might prefer getting the money up front and being able to work that way with the budget, right? So coming up with those solutions, I think, would be really helpful in the next couple of years, but I think it all wraps up to some of the questions around how do we get to zero youth homelessness, or how do we close the childcare gap, and these are all amazing things. I know our youth population is also shrinking, which is something we want to reverse, but in the meantime, thinking about just how do we provide that best quality of life for our kids and our youth. How do we do that in tandem with the school districts and all the community partners, right? School districts who are so close to the issues, but I'm thinking about our community partners who can create internship opportunities, right? I think about Road City Together, all the different businesses at that table. That is such an incredible group of community folks working towards a single issue like this. And then I'll just wrap up by saying, you know, I know I've brought up sort of funding and all of the ways of making that easier. It's been a couple of years now, I think 2019, when the council made this a citywide priority. So to Council Member Gee's point, I'd be curious to see what those funding trends have looked like in the last couple of years, and that way we can keep ourselves honest to what is acceptable for the city council, right, as we maneuver through all the financial headaches that we have in store. How do we keep that consistent and make sure that people don't feel a change in, you know, levels of service, right, so that's what I'm thinking about too, but again, just such a deep appreciation for all the work that you're doing as somebody who's benefited from so many of these projects listed on here and so many of these different community spaces. It just means a lot to see you all bring the joy to the work every day and continuing it, so I appreciate it, but colleagues, this is a study session, so we don't have to vote on anything, but just wanted to do last week. So Councillor Strickland, please.

Thank you very much. I just had some more comments. So, you know, Councillor Rapida mentioned barriers for kids, right? And so I combed through some of the BCC applications last night from specifically youth, some of whom we appointed, some we didn't, and I hope they apply again. But one that came up for me was Zane Rezac, who we did appoint. He had said, youth access to parks emits unequal access to facilities and gaps is important. So in talking about our fields, we're making lots of headway there, right? With improvements to Hoover Field, for example, changing to artificial turf. But that's just something that is on our young people's minds, right? accessibility and equitability of our service, of our parks, of our fields. And he also mentioned opportunities for civic engagement. So on that note, I Second, the idea around council interns. I know Mayor and then former Vice Mayor Lisette Espinosa-Garnica both had interns briefly during the YE program, I think it was a couple years ago. So we've done it creatively before, and I think we can do it creatively again. And then moving on to spokes program, I was also going to highlight that and thank you. Thank you for that program. But I was reading the county has adopted a e-bike ordinance recently, right? And I know we're not talking about that yet, but I do want to at least preface that conversation since we've heard a few of my colleagues touch on it. And in the Daily Journal, it said that the ordinance prohibits operating any of these devices in an unsafe manner, which could include tricks or wheelies, and phone use while writing. And I just want to reiterate what I've said before this day is that that kind of language definitely targets certain youth over others. So I'm really wary of that. And I hope that as we prepare our own ordinance that we are not replicating problematic language. or having any kind of oversights. And what was the other thing? Oh, but one thing I do appreciate about the ordinance is that it allows for riding mobility devices on sidewalks as necessary. And that was something we discussed before, that when the street does not allow, I should wrap up. Okay. When the street does not allow for safe riding on city streets, we need to allow kids to be able to ride on the sidewalks. That's all I'll say about that because it's not on the agenda. But it was mentioned in this report. And then just to summarize, so I think I heard at least three of my colleagues express support for kind of a breakdown of this demographic data that you provided, which is very comprehensive, by a zip code or other geographic equivalent. I would agree with that. So that is a majority, if anyone's counting, like me. And then in terms of next steps and engagement, would really like to see us receive a presentation from Robot City Together. A 10 minute presentation like we give so many other partners to learn more in depth what they're doing that's complimentary to us and that we are investing in. And then when we host study sessions like this, the thought occurred to me, why aren't we doing it with one of our youth representative bodies, like the TAB, like the YAB, like the Black Youth Advisory Council with BACAC? It's not how you say it. It's the Bay Area Health Advisory Council. There's so many options, and we should be doing that kind of engagement. I would rather this conversation be a conversation with youth and not about youth. And then finally, I'll just close by saying that we have made children and youth a priority for several councils at this point, but we are not funding it like it's a priority. And so looking ahead at the mid-year budget, I want to see us fund children and youth programs like it's a priority. Thank you.

Oh, I second that.

Any other thoughts, comments, colleagues? Not seeing any. Council Member Chu, I saw you reaching.

I agree. Where we spend our money reflects what we really prioritize.

Great. Thank you all. And with that, that was our study session. So we will keep it going. We do not take a formal action on this evening, but the work will continue. Thank you again to all of our representatives from parks and libraries. Thank you all for being here again. And we will move into item 10, matters of council interest, beginning with 10A, city council member report of meetings and conferences attended. and we'll go with Vice Mayor and then we'll go to Council Member Howard.

Okay, thank you. This past weekend, I went to the Redwood Shores Levee Cleanup, and they've been doing this, gosh, over 20 years now. It started with Pete and Ginny Hughes back in the day, and it was really nice to be with them. They counted 76 people who signed up to do it, and everyone was having a wonderful time, and the important thing was is that They went and walked around what we talked about today, the levees, and they cleaned up a whole bunch of stuff, and they had a wonderful time, and it was a great community event. So I want to thank Nina and others, Nina Bore and others who put this on and continue to do that and bring awareness to the importance of our levees. Union Cemetery also, they did... a major cleanup of Union Cemetery and it was lovely to attend. I think her name was Ellen Crawford, passed away not that long ago and I wasn't aware that she passed away. She was a real leader in Union Cemetery and getting people involved and cleaning up the monuments. pretty amazing and when I heard that she had passed away I was very sad and her family showed up and they said thank you for taking care of Union Cemetery but I thought I'd mentioned that and then of course I went to a lovely service with my colleagues for David Aiken on Saturday at the San Mateo County History Museum and what a lovely service and people had such beautiful things to say about your dad he sounded like a truly remarkable human being I wish I'd known him. So that's, thank you.

Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Howard.

And let's go to Council Member Sorkin. Three quick things. So like I mentioned earlier, I did go to Rebel City Together's summer showcase, summer intern showcase. 36 interns graduated from a variety of appointments at different non-profits, partners that we work with. It was just really amazing to see those kids and learn about what they did and accomplished and and hand them certificates alongside Supervisor Gaucher and State Senator Josh Becker, who drove in from Sacramento for the event, which was pretty impressive. Secondly, oh gosh, I already forgot what I was going to say, but I will leave it there, given the hour.

Thank you, Councilmember. Not seeing anyone else, we will move into item 10B and start with governance, and I'll send things over to the Vice Mayor.

The governance subcommittee comprised of Mayor Martina Ceballos, Councilmember Gee, and myself met on August 18th. The city's legislative consultants from California Public Policy Group, CPPG, provided a legislative overview which included updates on legislative timing, the vehicle license fee shortfall, tort reform, wildfire liability, data centers, budget trailer bills, and information on additional legislation affecting Redwood City. In accordance with the 2026 legislative platform, The committee discussed and confirmed the city's position on key bills, which included a position change to neutral on SB 1164 related to elections, which was approved on tonight's consent calendar. The next governance subcommittee meeting is scheduled for September 21st.

Thank you, Vice Mayor. And I'll give a quick update on the Intergovernmental Relations Ad Hoc. The Ad Hoc, comprised of Vice Mayor Akin, Council Member Gee, and myself, held its first meeting on July 28th. The committee reviewed the purpose of this committee, which is to collaborate with city staff on intergovernmental relations matters, including engagement with regional, county, state, federal, and affiliated agencies and organizations, identify opportunities to advance city priorities through partnerships and advocacy, and provide input on the strategic initiatives involving external governmental entities through December 2027. The next meeting is scheduled for this Thursday, August 27th. And on the project labor agreement ad hoc, the ad hoc comprised of council members Chris Sterkin and council member Gee and myself convened its first meeting on July 31st. The committee reviewed the purpose of this committee, which is to explore and assist the city manager in bringing forward for city council consideration potential project labor agreement policy options. And we expect to complete this work by the end of this calendar year. Staff presented to the committee on an overview of the project labor agreements and community workforce agreements, including what they are, the range of benefits and risks they might present, and the typical elements an agreement might involve. We are in the process of scheduling the next meeting for that committee. And we'll move into item 10C, an update from our city manager.

Thank you, Mayor. Just a real quick update. Thanks to the Mayor and Vice Mayor who agreed to agendize this at the next meeting, but I wanted to give the rest of the Council a heads up that on September 14th, we will be having a study session on the city's process of preparing for this winter. So please bring some, think about, we are looking at some ways in which we can do some unique outreach. Scientists are saying it's going to probably be a pretty heavy El Nino, and that does mean a roughly 50% chance, but we really want to get out there early. So folks that are listening right now, just wanted to let them know Derek Wolfgram will be leading that effort, but working closely with pretty much every department. So love some outreach ideas from the council and things we could do in individual neighborhoods. Thank you.

Thank you, Patrick.

And before our last item, we'll go to Council Member Strickland. Sorry, Mayor and Council. I just have two other report outs that I remember now. So I did attend the Police Advisory Committee meeting, a town hall that they had over the last week or the week before. And I just wanted to highlight a couple... things I learned from the member, or heard from the member. So John McMullen, one of the members, he supported adding damages to our contract with whichever vendor we choose to go with, if we do, in the event that they breach the contract. That was an interesting thought. And then Don, Daniel, excuse me, Turinian, uh, opposed a surveillance state and, uh, advocated for pausing the project, uh, process RFP process rather. And then there was majority support for basically not moving forward with the current status quo from, uh, Austin Bach, Christy Chang, um, Clara Jekyll and, uh, and, you know, Daniel Turney. And so that is just something that, um, you, I think you should know that we should know going into our next, uh, step of this process. And I really highly encourage you to watch the recording. If you haven't already, I was, I think the only one listening in, uh, I didn't go, uh, in person cause I didn't want to put my thumb on the scale, so to speak, but, um, it was very well attended, very robust conversation. And I really do think each of you should listen to it. And, um, I also went to the 901 Marshall open house on Thursday. That was well attended. The number one question apparently they received was, when can I move in? People thought it was already open. Then again, there was one person who did say you should knock it down a few stories. So there was a variety, but mostly very positive. So thanks.

Thank you for those updates, Council Member. Our last update is just we are moving into returning to closed session to discuss anticipated litigation and real property negotiations as identified on the agenda. Before we move to closed session, I'll ask the City Clerk if there's any public comment on the closed session item.

Thank you, Mayor. No public comment at this time. Last call to anyone who would like to give public comment on the closed session items this evening. Seeing none, Mayor, I turn it back to you.

Thank you. In the event that there is reportable action following the closed session, we will be returning to the dais to report the action. If no reportable action is taken, we will adjourn the meeting immediately following closed session and not return back to the dais. With that, I thank you all for joining tonight's City Council meeting. We're next scheduled to meet on Monday, September 14th. I wish you all a great evening and a week ahead. Thank you, everyone. All right, City Council's back, reconvening after closed session, and we took some action items, so I'll pass things over to our City Attorney.

Thank you, Mayor. So this is to report out on the conference with legal counsel on anticipated litigation. The City Council unanimously authorized initiation of litigation pursuant to California Government Code Section 54956.9. The information regarding the litigation will be available upon filing of the lawsuit upon request, but will not be available before then in order not to prejudice the city. Thank you so much.

Thank you, everyone, and we will adjourn. Our next meeting is September 14th. We will see you then. Thank you.